The main legal point established in the judgment is that challenges to land acquisition proceedings must be timely and cannot be based on frivolous grounds.

JUDGMENT :

SURESHWAR THAKUR, J.

1. Through the instant petition, the petitioners challenge the validity of a notification, as became issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter for short called as the ‘Act of 1894’). Moreover, the petitioners also makes a challenge to the validity of issuance of a notification under Section 6 of the ‘Act of 1894’ besides challenge the report (Annexure P-6), as made in compliance to the directions passed by a Division Bench of this Court.

2. The above notifications became respectively issued on 27.08.1987 (Annexure P-1) and on 25.08.1988 (Annexure P-3).

3. The writ petitioners earlier instituted CWP No. 3189/1989 before this Court, wherein, a challenge was made to the notifications (supra). The said writ petition was disposed of through an order made thereon on 28.09.1989. The order as made on the said writ petition becomes extracted hereinafter:

“Parties counsel are agreed with Mr. A. Banerjee, Financial Commissioner (Revenue) and Secretary to Government, Haryana shall be asked to go to the spot to examine as to whether the premises of the petitioners deserve, in the scheme of things, to be exempted from acquisition and that whatever be his decision with regard to each petitioners, it shall be treated as final.

In terms of the agreement so arrived at, we direct Mr. A. Banerjee, Financial Commissioner (Revenue) and Secretary to Government, Haryana, to go to village Jhasra, which is proximate to the spot, on October 26, 1989 reaching there at 10 o’clock and then roam about in the area to see what kind of building and plots have been exempted and as to whether there is any parity of those exempted plots and buildings with those of the petitioners, descering exemption. Any of the petitioner, who may choose to be present on the spot on the aforesaid date and time, may be so and made him such suggestions as are relevant for the purpose. It is expected of Mr. Banerjee to pass a short speaking order in respect of each case. On this understanding, we dispose of this writ petition, as also the connected ones.”

4. The Financial Commissioner and Secretary to Govt. of Haryana, Revenue Department submitted his report (Annexure R-2), and, therein, he did not recommend the makings of apposite exemptions vis-a-vis the acquired lands. However, the aggrieved petitioners concerned, rather remained dissatisfied with the report of the Financial Commissioner concerned, and proceeded to challenge the acquisition notifications, through theirs instituting the instant writ petition before this Court. Through a decision made on 04.12.2007, the writ petition (supra) was disposed of with certain directions. The relevant portion of the same is extracted hereinafter:

“......Since the petitioner has no objection to the acquisition of the land required for a public purpose, viz. construction of 320 meters long sewerage line alongside the Delhi-Jaipur NH-8, the application for vacation of stay, i.e., Civil Misc. No. 14009 of 2007, is allowed and stay in respect of the acquired land and marked yellow in the site map, Annexure R.1, is hereby vacated.

In view of the vacation of stay in respect of the land required for public purpose, the remaining land with constructed portion is not at all required for any public purpose because in respect of the part of the land, which was acquired for public purpose, stay order has been vacated today.

This petition is, accordingly, disposed of with a direction that land of the petitioner, shown in yellow colour in the site map, Annexure R.1, shall stand acquired, while the remaining part of the acquired land shall be released from acquisition altogether.

The petitioner may pursue his case for compensation for the acquired portion of his land before the appropriate forum.”

5. Feeling aggrieved from the order (Supra), the HUDA preferred LPA No. 2253-2011 before this Court. Through an order drawn thereon on 19.01.2017, the learned Division Bench of this ordered for restoration of the