JUDGMENT

Mr. Kuldeep Tiwari, J.

The petitioner has, through the instant writ petition, sought quashing of the land acquisition notifications dated 12.05.1995 and 10.05.1996, issued respectively under sections 4 and 6 of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1894'), on the ground, that the acquired lands have not been put to any efficacious use, despite elapse of more than 25 years.

2. As a matter of fact, the petitioner was owner of the petition lands, situated at Village Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar, which were put to acquisition, through issuance of an acquisition notice, under Section 4 of the Act of 1894, on 12.05.1995, by the State of Haryana, through Urban Estate Department, for the purpose of development, utilization for residential, industrial and commercial purposes, for pockets of Sectors 9 and 9-A in Bahadurgarh.

3. Aggrieved from the acquisition notice (supra), the petitioner filed objections under Section 5-A of the Act of 1894. However, in continuance of the acquisition proceedings, the department concerned issued another acquisition notice under Section 6 of the Act of 1894, on 10.05.1996, which was subsequently followed by an award under Section 11 of the ibid Act being announced on 24.04.1998.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has vociferously argued that since the acquired lands have not been put to any efficacious use, vis-a-vis, any developmental work, even after 25 years of its acquisition, therefore by virtue of Section 101 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Haryana Amendment) Act, 2017, the impugned acquisition notifications (supra) are liable to be set aside and the petition lands are liable to be de-notified.

5. Per contra, the learned State counsel has filed a status report by way of an affidavit of the Land Acquisition Collector concerned, perusal whereof reveals, that acquisition proceedings have already been finalized and an award under Section 11 of the ibid Act has also been announced way back on 24.04.1998. It make further revelations that the compensation amount of original award to the tune of Rs.10,44,259/- has also been received by the petitioner on 12.05.1998. However, to seek enhancement of the compensation amount (supra), the petitioner approached the learned Reference Court concerned by instituting a petition under Section 18 of the Act of 1894 and thereafter, the petitioner contested the matter qua enhancement of compensation amount up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The compensation amount of Rs.2,03,088/-, Rs.2,03,088/- and Rs.37,740/-, as enhanced by the learned Reference Court concerned, was disbursed in the bank account of the petitioner respectively on 04.02.2006, 23.01.2009 and 16.06.2009. The compensation amount of Rs.1,72,116/-, as enhanced by this Court, was disbursed in the bank account of the petitioner on 10.02.2010. Finally, the compensation amount of Rs.1,38,68,356/-, as enhanced by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, was disbursed in the bank account of the petitioner on 13.03.2018.

6. The learned counsels appearing for the respondents have specifically submitted that the petition lands affect the planning of housing board, 10 marla plots = 10, 8 marla plots= 18, 6 marla plots = 3, 2 numbers of 10 meter wide road and 18 meters wide road.

7. We have considered the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, however we are unable to accept the same for the hereinafter given reasons.

8. It is indisputable that the acquisition proceedings, qua the