State’s Right to Retain Lands for Public Purpose: Lands Integral to Layout Plans: Dismisses Petition for Release of Acquired Lands: Punjab & Haryana HC
In a significant judgement, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by Rohtas and others, seeking the release of their lands acquired by the State of Haryana. The Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Sudeepti Sharma ruled that the petitioners’ lands, being an integral component of the layout plans, were essential for public purpose and hence non-releasable.
The petitioners had approached the High Court seeking a mandamus for the release of their lands under clause 7 of the policy dated 14.09.2018. The State had decided to release lands that could not be utilized by the respondents. However, the Court observed, “A reading of the said contents does make graphic emergence(s), that the petition lands are earmarked for the apposite public purpose and thereby are utilized, or are utilizable, and or, are viable for facilitating the apposite public purpose.”
The Court further elucidated on the application of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act, 2013), particularly focusing on the lapsing provisions under Section 24(2) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013. It was noted that the petitioners’ claim for a lapsing declaration was not sustainable as compensation had been deposited, and possession had been assumed.
Addressing the petitioners’ reliance on Section 101 A of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 and the policy dated 14.09.2018, the Court found their arguments unhinged in the light of the lands being essential for public purpose. “Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioners has untenably planked the above argument, thus premised on the provisions of Section 101 A of the ‘Act of 2013’ and/or, upon, policy dated 14.09.2018,” the judgement read.
The Bench also rejected the petitioners’ claim of parity with other land losers like Mohinder Singh, stating that the circumstances of their case were distinctly different. The Court held, “The reason for drawing the above inference, becomes galvanized, from the factum that the release as was made, in favor of the said Mohinder Singh, was through an order made on 29.05.2019.”
In its final observations, the Court remarked, “In aftermath, this Court finds no merit in the writ petition, and, with the above observations, the same is dismissed.” The judgement reaffirms the State’s authority to retain lands acquired for public purposes and sets a significant precedent in matters of land acquisition and release under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013.
Date of Decision: 25th January 2024
ROHTAS AND ORS. VS STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.
