- (1.) The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against the action of the respondent State for illegally acquiring the land of the petitioners without payment of any compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity, the Act ). The land has been utilised after taking possession on 27.12.2001 for construction of water course. An attempt was made to acquire the land by issuing notification under Section 4 of the Act on 31.1.2002 for construction of reclamation channel but the notification has been allowed to lapse.
(2.) A similar matter arising out of the same notification had earlier come up before this Court in the case of Gurdeep Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others (CWP No. 11041 of 2009, decided on 10.2.2010, Annexure P-6). The operative part of the order passed by the Division Bench in the aforesaid proceedings reads as under:- Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that the petitioners have been treated harshly by the respondent. Firstly, they are deprived of their land and then no compensation has been paid for their land for the last about 9 years. The notifications issued under Section 4 & 6 of the Act in the years 2002 and 2003 have been permitted to lapse. In these circumstances, we accept the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and deem it just and appropriate to direct respondent Nos.2 & 3 to assess the damages in respect of the land of the petitioners at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per acre per annum from the date of acquiring possession, i.e., 27.12.2001 upto 30.06.2010 and pay them the amount so calculated along with 9% interest. The needful shall be done within two months from today. However, damages beyond 30.06.2010 can be calculated and paid up from the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act and the compensation with regard to the acquisition of the land has to be paid if any notification under Section 4 of the Act is issued and the award is passed as per the rates given in the award. The petitioners are at liberty to file fresh petition if no acquisition proceedings are initiated by the respondents within 6 months from today. In view of above, writ petition stands disposed of.
(3.) In the opening para of the preliminary submissions made in the reply filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 4, it has been pointed out that the respondents are ready to make payment as per the judgment dated 10.2.2010 passed in Gurdeep Singh s case (supra).;