JAIPARKASH ASSOCIATES LIMITED Vs. STATE OF H.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue involved in these writ petitions is similar and, therefore, both the writ petitions are being disposed of together by this common judgment.

(2.) The petitioners, essentially, have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court for declaration to the effect that requirements of Rule 4 of the Land Acquisition (Companies) Rules, 1963, (for short, the Rules), stand substantially satisfied in view of the inquiry conducted under Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (for short, the Act). The requirements which were to be satisfied in terms of Rule 4 of the Rules stand substantially satisfied and no separate inquiry is required under Rule 4 of the Rules ibid. The petitioner also sought writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to make an award within the stipulated period i.e. before the expiry of two years from the date of publication of the declaration under Sections 6 and 7 of the Act.

(3.) A brief reference may be made to the averments contained in both the writ petitions.