BHUPINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THROUGH the present writ petition, the petitioners seek the quashing of communication dated 28.5.2005, whereby their representation for de notifying the acquisition of their property has been rejected and also Annexures P 10, P 11 and P 11/A, i.e. notification under Section 4, declaration under Sections 6 and 7 of the Land Acquisition Act and the award of the Collector respectively, pertaining to the land of the petitioners, besides seeking s restraint order against the respondents from interfering in their possession over the property, sought to be got released from acquisition.

(2.) CERTAIN property of the petitioners, described in the writ petition, was notified for acquisition in the year 1977. A writ petition, seeking the quashing of that notification, was filed soon after the issuance of the said notification, which was registered as CWP No. 43 of 1977. The Government issued another notification, under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, for the acquisition of the same property in September, 1978. A C.M.P. was moved in the aforesaid Writ petition No. 43 of 1977, which was registered as CMP No. 1572 of 1979. Initially an order was passed on that application on 29.11.1979 staying dispossession of the writ petitioners from the property, by way of ad interim relief. However, vide order dated 30.3.1980, the aforesaid CMP No. 1572 of 1979 was dismissed with the observation that the acquisition stood completed as the award had been announced on 29.11.1979 and possession of the acquired land had also been taken by the Land Acquisition Collector and handed over to Housing Board, for which the land had been acquired. Ultimately the writ petition was also dismissed on merits, vide order dated 28.6.1985. An L.P.A. was filed against aforesaid order. During the pendency of the aforesaid L.P.A., again an attempt was made by the petitioners, by filing a C.M.P., to seek a restraint order against the respondents from dispossessing them. That C.M.P. was also dismissed with the finding that the possession of the acquired land had already been taken by the Land Acquisition Collector. Thereafter an appeal was filed in the Hon'ble Supreme Court against order dismissing the L.P.A. That too was dismissed, though as withdrawn. The writ petitioners thereafter made a representation to the Government for de acquisition of a portion of the acquired property. That representation has been dismissed, vide communication dated 28.5.2005. Annexure P 21.

(3.) THE aforesaid facts have been culled out from the pleadings, the documents as also the record of the earlier writ petition and the L.P.A., referred to here in above.