- (1.) Prayer made in the application is for placing on record Annexure P-15 vide which the application moved by the petitioner No. 1 has been returned. In view of the averments made in the application, which are supported by affidavit, the Civil Misc. Application is allowed. Annexure P-15 is taken on record. Civil Writ Petition No. 282 of 2013. 1. The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to release the land measuring 26 kanals situated in village Baliyana, Tehsil Sampla, District Rohtak pertaining to the petitioners from the acquisition as the land belonging to other similarly situated persons had been released. Further prayer has been made for quashing the notifications dated 10.1.2010 and 10.1.2011 (Annexures P-2 and P-9) issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act").
(2.) It has been pleaded that the petitioners were having a total 64 kanals 14 marlas of agricultural land in village Baliyana, Tehsil Sampla, District Rohtak out of which 38 kanals 14 marlas had earlier been acquired for establishing Industrial Model Township, Phase-I, Rohtak. After the said acquisition petitioners were left with only 26 kanals of land. Thereafter, another notification had been issued on 10.1.2010 for acquiring total land measuring 964 acres 3 kanals and 8 marlas of village Baliyana, Kharawar, Kheri-Sadh and Nonand. The said acquisition included the remaining land of the petitioners which was for extension of Industrial Model Township, Phase-III, Rohtak and other public utilities in Sectors 30-C, 30-D and 31-C. The petitioners had made representation for not acquiring the land to the Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak and also filed objections dated 10.2.2010 under Section 5-A of the Act against the proposed acquisition. Notice had been received by them on 22.7.2010 and they were summoned and appeared on 10.8.2010 before respondent No. 5 and apprised the authorities of their difficulties that all the family members would become unemployed. However, grant of personal hearing was just a mere eye wash and fertile land was being acquired and land which was barren had been left out from the acquisition. Reliance was also placed on the Civil Writ Petition No. 7655 of 2005- M/s. Sindhu Education Foundation and others v. State of Haryana and others which was decided on 17.11.2010by holding that the Administration was harassing its citizens. Reference was also made to the sale deed dated 18.11.2010 by which two acres land had been purchased by two person and the same was released from acquisition. Thereafter, notification under Section 6 of the Act had been issued on 10.1.2011 whereby 928 acres 3 kanals and 8 marlas of land was sought to be acquired including 26 kanals land pertaining to the petitioners. Accordingly, it was pleaded that 35 acres 17 kanals and 6 marlas land of influential persons had been released from acquisition. Photographs were appended to show that there was construction on the land in dis- pute also and it had a boundary wall.
(3.) On the aforesaid facts, learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently argued that the notifications in question acquiring the land are liable to be quashed and the land in question is liable to be released.;