JUDGMENT

G.S. Sandhawalia, J.

Challenge in the present writ petition by the present petitioners who are eight in number and legal heirs of deceased Sultan Singh is to the notifications issued under Section 4 & 6 of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894 (for short 1894 Act') dated 06.05.1992 (Annexure P-2) and 05.05.1993 (Annexure P-3), respectively alongwith Award dated 17.11.1994 (Annexure P-4). Resultant relief is sought for release of the land from acquisition in terms of the policy of Haryana Government dated 14.09.2018 (Annexure P-5) having been framed under Section 101A of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short 2013 Act').

2. As per the pleadings, the petitioners are the owners in possession of the land falling in village Mouza Patti Mussalman, Hadbast No.174, Sonipat and, their shares have been delineated in paragraph No.2 of the writ petition.

3. A perusal of the paper-book would go on to show that the land in question was acquired for the purposes of development and utilization of the land for Residential and Commercial Area of Sonipat in the said village bearing Hadbast No.174 and the acquisition was also made from two other villages namely Shahjahan Pur Hadbast No.82 and Jamalpur Kalan Hadbast No.173. From the village in question namely Patti Mussalman 121.51 acres were sought to be acquired, which was reduced to 121.34 acres as per Section 6 notification. Eventually Award No.6 dated 17.11.1994 had been passed for the land measuring 84.20 acres falling in village Patti Mussalman, Sonipat and the value of the land at that point of time was fixed @ Rs. 3,75,000/- per acre. Grand total of Rs. 5,04,65,953.05 was to be disbursed as per the statutory benefits also. The possession of the land was also noted which have been undertaken after offering compensation and as per the Award it vested in the ownership of Haryana Government and on transfer vested in Haryana Urban Development Authority now Haryana Shahri Vikas Pradhikran (HSVP). Apparently no action has been taken over all these years and the said land has vested in the State.

4. Keeping in view the litigation which was pending on account of the 2013 Act coming into force, the petitioners had joined another set of litigants and filed CWP No.6902 of 2019 Jai Pal and others v. State of Haryana and others' in which they were arrayed as petitioner Nos.9 to 16 and sought the relief of lapsing under Section 24 (2) of the 2013 Act. The said case was dismissed on 24.11.2020 on the ground that no cause of action survived in view of the judgment of the Apex Court passed in 'Indore Development Authority v. Manohar Lal and others' AIR 2020 SC 1496. Counsel at that point of time had taken permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file afresh if there is any other cause of action. Admittedly at that point of time policy dated 14.09.2018 (Annexure P-5) was already in force and no permission as such was taken for seeking re-consideration on the same. The order dated 24.11.2020 passed in Jai Pal (supra) reads as under:-

"Case has been heard through Video Conferencing on account of Covid-19 Pandemic.

Admittedly, in view of judgment in Indore Development Authority v. Manohar Lal and others, SLP(C) Nos. 9036-9038 of 2016 decided on 6.3.2020, no cause of action survives in this petition. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he may be allowed to withdraw the instant petition with liberty to file afresh if there is any other cause of action.

Dismissed as withdrawn with aforesaid liberty.

5. Thereafter, after a period of almost