SURJIT SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
LAWS(P&H)-2012-12-201
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on December 04,2012

Surjit Singh And Another Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Petitioner No.1 is owner of Khasra Nos.998, 1000 and 1002 whereas petitioner No.2 is owner of Khasra Nos.978, 979 and 980 of the land comprising in Village Ratti Rori, Tehsil & District Faridkot. Such land along with the other land was subject matter of acquisition for construction of Kameana Minor from RD 7600 to RD 37000 by notification dated 28.04.2011 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the Act") followed by the notification under Section 6 of the Act on 23.05.2011 invoking urgency provisions.
(2.) The challenge to the said notifications is for the reason that the proposed Minor shall bifurcate their small holdings and that there is no dire urgency which may warrant dispensation of enquiry before publication of notification under Section 6 of the Act.
(3.) In the written statement, it is averred that the Kameana Minor will not bifurcate the land of the petitioners in any manner as it is being carried out at the boundary of the Village and that land owners of Villages Ratti Rori, Kameana, Qila Nau, Hariye Wala, Sukhan Wala and Dana Romana have given a joint representation for construction of Minor so as to obtain proper irrigation and for avoiding land becoming barren. Therefore, the Minor was proposed at the cost of Rs.6,30,07,960/- including compensation of Rs.20.50 lacs for building, tubewell, bore and kotha etc. It is also pointed out that alignment of the canal in the disputed land RD 10800 to 15854 of Kameana Minor is along with the common boundary of Village Kameana and Village Ratti Rori and that sanctioned length of Kameana Minor is 11.3 Km. out of which 9.5 Km. area has already been constructed and only 1.8 Km. is to be constructed that is the land in question.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.