Sulochana Devi vs State Of Haryana And Ors

CWP No.17823 of 2015 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
268
CWP No.17823 of 2015 (O&M)
th
Date of decision: September 8 , 2026
Sulochana Devi
.....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
.....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DIVYA SHARMA
Present: Mr. Mohan Singh Puri, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Saurabh Mago, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana.
Mr. Sharad Aggarwal, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
1. The prayer in the present civil writ petition under Article
226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ in the nature of
certiorari for quashing the acquisition proceedings initiated by the Haryana
Government vide its Industries & Commerce Department Gazette
Notification No. 32/13/2005-4IB1 dated 20.06.2005 (Annexure P-1)
published under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and
notification dated 26.06.2006 (Annexure P-2) published under Section 6 of
the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 qua the land of the petitioner bearing
Rectangle/Khasra No.18//1/2/2/2 measuring 1 kanal 1 marla situated in the
revenue estate of Village Dhakaula, Hadbast No.135, District Ambala.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the written
statement filed on behalf of respondent No.2 on 03.09.2026 to contend that
PUNEET SACHDEVA
2026.09.11 10:11
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh

CWP No.17823 of 2015 (O&M) 2
as per the stand of the respondent No.2, the land owned by the petitioner
comprised in Khasra No.18//1/2/2/2 measuring 1 kanal 1 marla was acquired
vide an earlier notification dated 21.06.1999 under Section 4 and dated
23.03.2000 under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. It is further
submitted that as per the said stand, the respondent-authorities have stated
that the award regarding the said acquisition was also passed on 18.01.2002
and the compensation amount with respect to the petitioner’s land stands
deposited. It is submitted that in the same paragraph, the respondent No.2
has taken a plea that subsequently by virtue of the impugned notifications
dated 20.06.2005 and 26.06.2006, the land of the petitioner was again
acquired inadvertently. Paragraph 5 of the said written statement which has
been highlighted by learned counsel for the petitioner is reproduced
hereinbelow:
“5. That it is submitted here that the land bearing Khasra no.
18//1/2/2 (3K-6M) was notified u/s 4 & 6 on 21.06.1999 &
23.03.2000 out of 3K-6M land, the petitioner share of land
bearing Khasra no. 18//1/2/2/2 (1K-1M) of village Dhakula,
District Ambala. The award of the said land has already been
announced by SDO (C) cum LAC, Ambala vide award no.1
dated 18.01.2002. The compensation amount of petitioner land
(against the award dated 18.01.2002) Rs. 50695.15/- unpaid and
lying with SDO (civil) cum LAC, Ambala. It is relevant to
mention here that the land of the petitioner and other land
owners on the same Khasra no. 18//1/2/2 was acquired twice
i.e. in the year 2002 & 2008. The land bearing Khasra no.
18//1/2/2/1 (OK-4M), 1/2/2/2 (1K-1M), 1/2/2/3 (OK-18M) &
1/2/2/4 (1K-3M) total measuring 3K-6M was acquired
inadvertently in the year 2008 vide award dated 19.06.2008.
PUNEET SACHDEVA
2026.09.11 10:11
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh

CWP No.17823 of 2015 (O&M) 3
Thereafter, the compensation amount of Rs. 174300/- was again
deposited with the LAC, Ambala. The copy of award dated
18.01.2002 is annexed herewith as Annexure R-2/1.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
impugned notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
dated 20.06.2005 as well as the declaration under Section 6 issued on
26.06.2006 qua the petitioner be set aside.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents have submitted that since
the land of the petitioner was already acquired vide notification issued under
Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 21.06.1999 and the
notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 which was
issued on 23.06.2000 and the award regarding the same was already passed
on 18.01.2002 and since the earlier notification as well as the award which
has not been challenged by the petitioner would be valid, thus in view of the
same, the subsequent notification dated 20.06.2005 issued under Section 4
of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and 26.06.2006 issued under Section 6 of
the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as well as the subsequent award deserve to
be quashed qua the land of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the land
of the petitioner would still vest in the respondents-State as the petitioner has
not challenged the earlier notification under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 and the award dated 18.01.2002. It is further
highlighted that, in paragraph 6 of the reply dated 03.09.2026, it has been
specifically stated that in pursuance of the award dated 18.01.2002,
possession of the land has been taken vide dhakhal karwahi No.540 dated
26.05.2004 and a copy of the said dhakhal karwahi has also been annexed as
PUNEET SACHDEVA
2026.09.11 10:11
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh

CWP No.17823 of 2015 (O&M) 4
Annexure R-2/2 along with the reply.
5. The present case has very peculiar facts. As per the case of the
petitioner, the petitioner is the owner of the land measuring 1 kanal 1 marla
comprised in Rectangle/Khasra No.18//1/2/2/2 in Village Dhakola, Tehsil
Barara, District Ambala. It is the specific stand of the respondents, which is
not disputed on behalf of the petitioner and rather has been highlighted on
behalf of the petitioner that the said khasra number which measures 3 kanals
6 marlas which also included the land of the petitioner was acquired vide
notification dated 21.06.1999 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894 and by the notification dated 23.03.2000 under Section 6 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894. The award regarding the same was also announced
on 18.01.2002 and the compensation regarding the same was tendered and is
lying before the SDO-cum-Land Acquisition Collector, Ambala. The
petitioner has neither argued nor shown before this Court that the land of the
petitioner was not acquired by virtue of the abovesaid notifications. The
respondents have stated that once the land of the petitioner was already
acquired and vested with the State Government, then it was only
inadvertently that the respondents again issued the impugned notification
dated 20.06.2005 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the
notification dated 26.06.2006 under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894 and again passed the award qua the land in question. The respondents
in the said circumstances have conceded to the prayer of the petitioner to
quash the subsequent notifications which have been impugned as the land
already stands vested with the State. It is also the specific case of the
PUNEET SACHDEVA
2026.09.11 10:11
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh

CWP No.17823 of 2015 (O&M) 5
respondents that the possession of the land in question has been taken vide
dakhal karwai No.540 dated 26.05.2004 in pursuance of the award dated
18.01.2002. It could not be disputed before this Court on behalf of the
petitioner that once the land stands already acquired, then, in the absence of
any challenge to the earlier notifications, no benefit could be granted to the
petitioner, even in case the prayer of the petitioner is accepted and the
subsequent notifications are quashed.
6. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances, the
present writ petition is disposed of and the notification dated 20.06.2005
issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the
notification dated 26.06.2006 issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition
Act, 1894 and the award qua the same which have been challenged before
this Court are quashed qua the land in question with the observations that the
land of the petitioner already stands acquired by virtue of the notifications
under Sections 4 and 6 issued on 21.06.1999 and 23.03.2000 and the award
dated 18.01.2002.
(VIKAS BAHL)
JUDGE
th
September 8 , 2026 (DIVYA SHARMA)
Puneet
JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes
Whether reportable : Yes
PUNEET SACHDEVA
2026.09.11 10:11
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh