KAILASH WATI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have prayed for the issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') dated 31.1.1992 (Annexure P-20) and 29.1.1993 (Annexure P-22), Notice under Section 9 (Annexures P-23 & P-24) and Award (Annexure P-26-A) under Section 11 of the Act.

(2.) THE petitioner's case is that although declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 29.1.1993 but the award was announced on 5.3.2003 and therefore as the award has not been announced within a period of two years, hence the same is liable to be quashed.

(3.) WRITTEN statement has been filed by the Land Acquisition Officer, U.T. Chandigarh, on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 wherein it has been averred that the aforementioned notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act were challenged in as many as 31 writ petitions on the ground that the petitioners had constructed their residential houses over the acquired land and some of the houses were even built after getting the plan sanctioned by the Notified Area Committee. In CWP No. 2126 of 1993 this Court had stayed further proceedings by an interim order dated 24.2.1993. Ultimately, these writ petitions were dismissed with costs by a Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2126 of 1993 decided on 22.9.1995. Thereafter, another writ petition i.e. CWP No. 4433 of 1996 was filed under the title Ghanpal Singh and others v. Union Territory and others in which further proceedings were stayed till further orders. The said writ petition was allowed vide order dated 11.8.1997 and notifications under Sections 4 and 6 were quashed. The Chandigarh Administration then filed a Review Application No. 244 of 1998 which was allowed by a detailed order dated 31.1.2003 and thereby the order dated 11.8.1997 was recalled. In between, numerous writ petitions were also filed i.e. CWP No. 14804 of 1993, CWP No. 14892 of 1998 and CWP No. 14903 of 1998 and in all these writ petitions initially stay of further proceedings was ordered but ultimately these were dismissed by passing a detailed order dated 30.9.1998. In another bunch of eight writ petitions, further proceedings had been ordered to be stayed but these were also dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 4.8.1998. Thus, the notifications had been challenged in 43 different writ petitions and further proceedings in the land acquisition matter remained under stay from 24.2.1993 to 31.1.2003.