A delay in issuing the final notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, without any convincing explanation, can be considered mala fide and intended to peg down the prices of the land.

P.C.Jain, J.

1. The petitioner is the owner of land measuring 16 Kanals comprised in Khasra No. 10 (8 Kanals 0 Marla and 11 (8 Kanals 0 Marla) of Rectangle No. 31 situate in the revenue estate of Ratgal, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra. Originally, the petitioner was the owner of 176 Kanals of land in this village out of which 160 Kanals had been acquired by the State from time to time and he is left with only the aforesaid 16 Kanals of land which is in his possession. The petitioner submitted an application to the Director, Town and Country Planning Department, Haryana, under the Controlled Areas Act for permitting him to use the aforesaid lands for residential purposes, but the prayer was declined and his appeal to the Director was also rejected.

2. It is further averred in the petition that the State of Haryana issued a notification No. LAC(P)-72/NTLA/2124, dated 3rd November, 1972, published in the Haryana Government Gazette (Extraordinary) dated 3rd November, 1972, under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in respect of 3000 acres of land situated in villages Bazidpur, Bir Pipli, Pipli, Devidaspura, Umri, Palwal, Sunderpur, Dera Kalan, Ratgal and Dera Khurd of Tehsil Thanesar, District Karnal, now District Kurukshetra. In respect of village Ratgal, the notification mentioned the area of acquisition to be 710-13 acres, thereby covering the entire land of the petitioner. Another notification No. 2133 dated 3rd November, 1972, was issued by the Local Government Department of the State whereby besides the area situated in other villages, land measuring 710.13 acres which was the total area of village Ratgal, was sought to be acquired.

3. It is further stated that since the issuance of notification dated 3rd November, 1972, respondent No. 1 has been issuing successive notifications under section 4 of the Act for acquiring the above referred lands of the petitioner. The last notification which had been issued by respondent No. 1 in this respect was dated 11th March, 1981, under which besides the lands situated in other villages 51-39 acres of land of village Ratgal including the disputed land of the petitioner was sought to be acquired for development and utilization of land as City Centre for Sector 10.The petitioner filed his objections dated 1st April, 1981 under section 5-A of the Act but those objections have not been decided as no intimation was received by the petitioner. It is on the basis of the aforesaid averments that the petitioner has called in question the legality of the notifications.

4. In response to the notice of motion issued, the respondents have filed written statement in which the material allegations made in the petition have been controverted. So far as the dates of issuance of notifications are concerned, the same is not disputed in the written statement. About the objections filed under Section 5-A of the Act, the respondents have averred that the final receipt of the report on 4th February, 1982, the matter was considered by the Government and notification under section 6 of the Act was being issued very shortly.

5. On the basis of the admitted facts, it is contended by Mr. M.S. Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the whole process adopted by the State Government for acquiring the land of the petitioner by issuing notifications indiscreetly is to peg down the prices. What is sought to be argued by the learned counsel is that since 1972 when the first notification was issued, no concrete steps have been taken by the Government and the result of issuance of successive notifications is that there is no buyer of lands and in that manner the Government has succeeded in pegging down the prices. On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that the final notification was issued in 1981 under section 4 of the Act and that notification under section 6 of the Act was going to be issued very shortly i.e. withi