HEMANT GUPTA, J. - (1.) THE petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court for quashing of notification dated 27.8.1987, Annexure P-1, under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter to be referred as "the Act") and the notification dated 25.8.1988 under Section 6 of the Act.
(2.) THE petitioners are the owners of land measuring 127 Kanals 17 Marlas of land. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the acquisition to the extent of the area which is under A Class construction allegedly raised by the petitioners much prior to the acquisition proceedings. The petitioners have alleged that the construction was raised in the year 1987 after spending a sum of Rs. 4 lacs. The construction raised on behalf of petitioner No. 1 is in Rectangle No. 50 Khasra Nos. 17, 18, 19/1 and Rectangle No. 76/9/1 whereas the construction raised by petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 is in Rectangle Nos. 76/8, 13/1. The petitioners have pleaded that earlier the petitioners challenged the acquisition proceedings by way of a Civil Writ Petition No. 3176 of 1989 which was disposed of on September 28, 1989 on the basis of a following agreed order :- "Parties counsel are agreed with Mr. A. Banerjee, Financial Commissioner (Revenue) and Secretary to Government, Haryana, shall he asked to go to the spot to examine as to whether the premises of the petitioners deserve, in the scheme of things, to be exempted from acquisition and that whatever be his decision with regard to each petitioner, it shall be treated as final. In terms of the agreement so arrived at, we direct Mr. Banerjee, Financial Commissioner (Revenue) and Secretary to Government Haryana, to go to village Jharsa, which is proximate to the spot, on October 26, 1989 reaching there at 10 O'clock and then roam about in the area to see what kind of building and plots have been exempted and as to whether there is any parity of those exempted plots and building with those of the petitioners deserving exemption. Any of the petitioners, who may choose to be present on the spot on the aforesaid date and time, may do so and make him such suggestions as are relevant for the purpose. It is expected of Mr. Banerjee to pass a short speaking order in respect of each case. On this understanding we dispose of this writ petition, as also the connected one. September 28, 1989 Sd/- M.M. Punchhi, Judge, Sd/- A.L. Bahri, Judge."
(3.) IN pursuance of the directions of this Court as reproduced above Shri A. Banerjee, the then Financial Commissioner and Secretary to Government Haryana, Revenue Department, inspected the spot and gave his following report :- "These three petitioners jointly hold 127 Kanals 17 Marlas of land. Laxmi petitioner has constructed two rooms on rectangle No. 50/18 and these rooms are used as residence. The other petitioners have jointly constructed rooms on rectangle Nos. 76/9, 76/13. They have claimed that the construction was completed before the issue of the notification and is of 'A' class quality. Spot inspection showed that the entire land is enclosed by a boundary wall and four rooms have been constructed at the four corners of the land. The construction does not seem to be very old although it is difficult to estimate correctly whether it was completed before the issue of the notification under Section 4. The departmental representative, however, conceded that the construction existed before the issue of the notification. However, this land borders on National Highway No. 8 and some of the rooms have been released in Prem Puri Mohalla. This argument is not relevant as Prem Puri Mohalla is a large area, where a number of houses have been constructed whereas the land of the petitioners is not located in a built-up area. The rooms bordering on the National Highway No. 8 are liable to be demolished in any case as they have been built in contravention of the provisions of the Act referred to above. Exemption of the rest of the area would mean that this land would be in the midst of land being acquired by HUDA for development of Sector 32. In any case only two rooms have been constructed in the area outside the limits of the prohibited area and this would not justify the land being exempted from acquisition." A perusal of the report shows that the entire area is enclosed by a boundary wall and four rooms have been constructed at four corners of the land and the construction does not seem to be very old. It has been further found that the rooms bordering on National Highway No. 8 are liable to be demolished as they have been built up in contravention of the provisions of the Act whereas the exemption of the rest of the area would mean that this land would be in the midst of the land acquired by the Haryana Urban Development Authority for development of Sector 32. In any case, only two rooms have been constructed in the area outside the limits of the prohibited area and this would not justify the land being exempted from acquisition.;