GURMEJ SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will also dispose of Civil Revision Petition No. 3546 of 1987, as the question involved is common in both the cases.

(2.) The land of the petitioner was acquired vide notification dated 28.2.1980. The award was given by the Collector on 5.12.1980. No reference was claimed by the petitioners. The other landowners claimed reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The learned District Judge enhanced the compensation vide award dated 3.10.1984. The petitioner filed execution application claiming the same amount of compensation which was awarded to the other landowners who had claimed reference. The said execution application filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Karnal, vide order dated 3.1.1987, which reads as under :-

(3.) Admittedly, the petitioner never challenged the order dated 3.1.1987. Any order passed subsequently refusing to review the said order could not be challenged by way of this revision petition. Apart from the above, there is nothing wrong or illegal in the impugned order as to be challenged in the revision petition. Similar matter has already been decided in Civil Revision No. 371 of 1988 (Shrimati Champa v. State of Haryana), decided on 3.3.1989. Reliance has been placed therein on the Supreme Court pronouncement in Mewa Ram v. State of Haryana, 1986 RevLR 488, which is to the following effect :-