Jasbir Singh, J. - (1.) WHEN notice of motion was issued, reliance was placed upon pendency of Civil Writ Petition No. 6339 of 1990. In this case, dispossession of the Petitioners and further proceedings were stayed by the Court vide order dated May 18, 1990.
(2.) CIVIL Writ Petition No. 6339 of 1990 along with CWP No. 4542 of 1990 were disposed of by this Court on October 7, 2010, by passing the following order: In CWP Nos. 6339 of 1990 and 10929 of 1990, challenge has been made to a notification issued under Section 4 of the Act on 12.4.1990, proposing to acquire 7.47 acres of land, which was earlier left out from acquisition, as discussed in preceding paragraphs of this judgment. It is case of Mr. Sareen that notification was issued in a mala fide manner and that the government in power, wanted to harm interest of the Petitioners because they are relatives of Mr. Surjit Singh Mann, who had been Member of Legislative Assembly and Cabinet Minister. To show that notification was issued with ill -intention, he has made reference to a fact that in CWP No. 4542 of 1990, challenging notifications issued earlier for acquisition of their land, stay was granted by this Court on 4.4.1990 and the impugned notification was issued on 12.4.1990 to deny benefit to the Petitioners of order passed in their favour. He also made reference to the notice issued to the Petitioners under the provisions of Punjab Schedule Road and Controlled Area Restriction of Unregulated Development Act, 1963 for demolition of their construction and recording of an FIR against them. Be that as it may, only a notification under Section 4 of the Act has been issued. When the writ petition was filed by them, further proceedings were stayed on 3.5.1990. Much water has flown since then. The Petitioners may approach the authorities concerned by filing objections under Section 5 -A of the Act. The land, which is subject matter of notification dated 12.4.1990 was earlier released by the authorities by taking a conscious decision and as per information supplied, it also does not interfere in the development of the main scheme (which virtually stood implemented except for the area involved in these writ petitions), it is expected that the authorities will consider their case in a sympathetic manner. The Petitioners are permitted to file objections within a period of three weeks from today, which shall be considered by the authorities concerned in a very rational and reasonable manner. With above said observations, these two writ petitions stand disposed of. This writ petition is fully covered by ratio of the judgment of this Court in the above said cases. In this writ petition also, challenge is only to a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
(3.) ACCORDINGLY , this writ petition is disposed of in the same terms as in the case of M/S Mann Cold Storage and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors., Civil Writ Petition No. 4542 of 1990, decided on October 7, 2010.;