Ajay Mittal, J. - (1.) The petitioners pray for quashing the notifications issued under sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (In short, "the Act") and the award dated 28.2.2016, 27.2.2007 and 3.3.2009, Annexures P.2, P.3 and P.4 respectively.
(2.) A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy involved as narrated in the petition may be noticed. The petitioners were owners in possession of agricultural land situated in Village Jandali, Tehsil and District Ambala. They were cultivating their land. According to the petitioners, by way of fraud, the land had been taken away from them under the threat of acquisition at throwaway price and sold to the private respondents vide sale deeds dated 22.3.2006 and 8.3.2007. The builders/developers were trying to grab the land of the petitioners along with other land. On 28.2.2006, notification, Annexure P.2 under section 4 of the Act was issued proposing to acquire the land measuring 165.13 acres of Village Jandali, 50.40 acres of land of Village Kanwali, 33.91 acres of land of Village Saunda and 3.86 acres of land of Village Sarai, Mehdood, District Ambala including the land of the petitioners for development and utilisation as commercial, residential and institutional area for Sector 23, Ambala City. Thereafter, respondent Nos.5 and 6 started purchasing the land of the farmers in Sector 23, Ambala for making construction in connivance with the respondents. Subsequently, another notification, Annexure P.3 was issued under Section 6 of the Act on 27.2.2007 for Sector 23, Ambala. In the said notification, respondents No.1 to 4 did not acquire the land purchased by the company although it was mentioned in the notification under section 4 of the Act and released it from acquisition and only the land of the farmers who had not sold their land to the company at a throwaway price had been acquired. On 3.3.2009, the Land Acquisition Collector announced the award, Annexure P.4. According to the petitioners, the entire proceedings for acquisition were initiated for the benefit of respondent No.5. Subsequently, respondent No.3 issued licence dated 12.11.2007 to private respondent No. 5 i.e. Vatika Land Base Pvt. Limited, New Delhi. Thus, the purpose for which the land was acquired was not fulfilled. Hence the instant writ petition by the petitioners.
(3.) In the written statement filed on behalf of respondents No.5 and 6, it has been inter alia stated that no objections under section 5A of the Act had bene filed by the petitioners. The necessary parties in whose favour the land was released by the State were not made parties to the writ petition. Further,' the notification under section 4 of the Act was issued in the year 2006 and the award was announced in the year 2009 whereas the present writ petition was filed in the year 2015. Further, as per averments of respondents No.5 and 6 in their written statement, the notification under section 6 of the Act was issued on 27.2.2007 for an area measuring 95.25 acres and thereafter the award was announced on 3.3.2009 for 94.25 acres. The allegations of malafide and fraud were denied. It has been claimed that licence has been issued in favour of respondents No.5 and 6 and the land owners in respect of land which is not declared under Section 6 of the Act. Thus, the writ petition after six years of passing of the award was not maintainable as per law. On these premises, prayer for dismissal of the writ petition has been made.;