Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sandeep Vihar (Awho) Society (Ghs-79) vs State Of Haryana And Others on 6 May, 2024
Author: Arun Palli
Bench: Arun Palli
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:062503-DB
CWP-9997-2024(O&M) 1 2024:PHHC:062503-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP-9997-2024(O&M)
Date of decision: 06.05.2024
Sandeep Vihar (AWHO) Society
... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL
Present: Mr. Ish Puneet Singh, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Ankur Mittal, Addl. AG, Haryana, and
Mr. Karan Jindal, AAG, Haryana, for respondent No.1-State.
Mr. Ankur Mittal, Advocate, and
Ms. Kushaldeep Kaur, and Ms. Saanvi Singla, Advocate,
for respondents No.2 to 8.
***
ARUN PALLI, J. (Oral)
The petitioner - Sandeep Vihar (AWHO) Society has prayed for
the following substantive relief:
"Civil Writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the
Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature
of certiorari for quashing of the following orders/notices,
being illegal and unsustainable, in the facts and
circumstances of the present case, in the interest of
justice:
(a) Order dated 29.05.2023 (Annexure P-41)
passed by respondent no. 3;
(b) Order dated 13.05.2020 (Annexure P-29)
passed by respondent no. 4;
(c) Letter dated 19.01.2018 (Annexure P-26)
issued by respondent no. on behalf of respondent
no. 2'
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:062503-DB
CWP-9997-2024(O&M) 2 2024:PHHC:062503-DB
(d) Demand Notice dated 14.01.2016 (Annexure
P-19) issued by respondent no. 5.
AND/OR
Further it is humbly prayed that the official respondents
may kindly be directed to calculate the payment for Plot
No. GH-79, Sector 20, Panchkula on account of
enhancement of the value of the land by the Courts in
consonance with Instruction No. 63 dated 22.08.2019 (P-
42) which has been amended vide Instruction No. 67
dated 04.12.2020 (P-43) and, in the facts and
circumstances of the present case, in the interest of
justice."
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner on May 2, 2024,
this Court has passed the following order:
"Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the Reference Court had evaluated the compensation @
Rs.394/- per sq. yard, and upon the demand raised by
the respondent(s) towards additional cost owing to
acquisition, the petitioner had remitted the required
amount. Although, whereafter this Court, vide order
and judgment dated 05.11.2012 had reduced the
compensation to Rs.366 per sq. yard, but in appeals
preferred by both the parties before the Supreme Court,
the compensation was again enhanced to Rs.394/- per sq.
yard. And, the assessment made by the Reference Court
was affirmed. Therefore, he submits that there was
hardly any occasion for the respondents to raise any
further demand since the demand for additional cost,
pursuant to the award rendered by the Reference Court,
had already been made good. Hence, he asserts that the
impugned notices requiring the petitioner to pay further
amount are palpably erroneous.
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:062503-DB
CWP-9997-2024(O&M) 3 2024:PHHC:062503-DB
Served with the advance copy of the petition(s),
Mr. Ankur Mittal, learned Additional Advocate General,
Haryana is present in Court on behalf of the
respondents. At the outset, he prays for a short
accommodation to seek instructions and respond.
Adjourned to 06.05.2024.
To be shown in the urgent list at serial No.1."
In response to the order referred to above, learned Additional
Advocate General, Haryana fairly submits that apparently the matter does not
appear to have been examined in the right earnest, for the issues that arise for
consideration have not been dilated upon. Accordingly, he submits, it would be
expedient if this petition, at this stage, is disposed of to enable the competent
authority to re-consider the matter in its entirety. And pass fresh orders in
accordance with law. He submits that before any such orders are passed, the
petitioner shall be heard, for which a formal communication will be issued
well in advance. Further, he submits that the petitioner shall also be at liberty
to support/supplement its claim by furnishing any fresh material/documents.
As regards the speaking order dated 29.05.2023 (P-41), passed by
the respondent-authorities, he submits that the same be deemed to have been
withdrawn/re-called.
That being so, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that let
this petition be disposed of in the wake of the statement made by learned State
counsel. However, he submits the authorities be directed to pass the necessary
orders within a specified time.
To which, learned State counsel submits that the required orders
shall be passed within a period of eight weeks from today.
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:062503-DB
CWP-9997-2024(O&M) 4 2024:PHHC:062503-DB
In the wake of the position sketched out above, and in terms of the
statements made by learned counsel for the parties, the petition stands disposed
of.
This Court is sanguine that the competent authority shall re-
consider the matter in issue in the right earnest, and pass a comprehensive
order assigning reasons in support thereof, within the time indicated by learned
State counsel.
However, it is made clear that this order shall not constitute any
expression of opinion on the merits of the case of either party, for, as indicated
above, the competent authority shall examine the concerns/grievances of the
petitioner, strictly in accordance with law.
( Arun Palli )
Judge
( Vikram Aggarwal )
06.05.2024 Judge
Rajan
Whether speaking / reasoned: YES/NO
Whether Reportable: YES/NO
4 of 4
