***

VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL) –

1. In the present writ petition, following prayers have been made:-

“Civil Writ Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing notification dated 26.12.1977 and dated 23.12.1980 issued under Section 4 and 6 respectively (annexure P-4 & P-5) under Land Acquisition Act 1894 for acquisition of land for public purpose and further quashing of subsequent notices and award dated 5.11.1981, whereby land of the petitioner has been acquired, a plot measuring 200 Sq. yard with construction, in terms of section 24(2) of Land Acquisition Act.

And a writ of mandamus directing respondents to release the land of the petitioners, since physical possession of the impugned land is with the petitioners since the award was announced on 05.11.1981 and petitioner has not taken any compensation till date and craves for quashing the said notifications in terms of Section 24 (2) of Land Acquisition Act 2014.

Any other writ, order or direction may kindly be issued in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and it is further prayed that during the pendency of the Writ Petition, dispossession of the petitioner from the land in question may kindly be stayed.”

2. Learned counsel for the respondent-State has submitted that in the present case, notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter to be referred to as “1894 Act”) was issued on 26.12.1977 for development and utilization of land as residential and commercial area at Gurugaon and declaration under Section 6 of the 1894 Act was issued on 23.12.1980 and the award was passed on 05.11.1981 and the possession has also been taken vide rapat no.86 dated 05.11.1981. It is further submitted that the total amount of compensation awarded in the present case was Rs.61,11,860.15/- out of which an amount of Rs.36,67,116/- has already been released and the rest of the amount has also been tendered and has been deposited and can be withdrawn by the land owners. It is further submitted that the present writ petition has been filed in the year 2016 after a delay of more than 30 years from the date of passing of the award and thus, challenge to the acquisition deserves to be dismissed in view of the law laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Indore Development Authority Vs. Manoharlal and others reported as (2020) 8 SCC 129 = (2020) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 15233 as well as by this Court in case titled as “Gopal Singh Rathi and others Vs. State of Haryana and others”, passed in CWP-13333-2016, decided on 23.07.2026.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions of the petitioner, has submitted that in view of the same, the petitioner seeks to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to move representation to the respondents-State for invoking the provisions of Section 101-A of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter to be referred as “the 2013 Act”). It is submitted that the said aspect would still be open, even in case the petitioner gives up his challenge to the notifications and the award. It is further submitted that the competent authority of respondent no.1 be directed to consider and decide the said representation after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, in accordance with law in a time bound manner.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents-State has submitted that in case the petitioner is giving up his challenge to the notifications and the award and in case he files a representation requesting the State to invoke the power under Section 101-A of the 2013 Act, then, the said representation would be considered and decided after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of four months from the date of submission of the said representation.

5. Keeping in view the above said facts and circumstances and the fair stand taken on behalf of the petitioner and the respondents-State, while permitting the petitioner to withdraw the present writ petition as far as the challenge to the notifications and the award is concerned, the petitioner is permitted to file a representation requesting the State Government to invoke the power under Section 101-A of the 2013 Act within a period of one month from today and in case any such representation is filed, the competent authority of respondent no.1 is directed to consider and decide the same after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, in accordance with law within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the said representation.

6. It is made clear that the said representation would only be filed on the aspect of Section 101-A of the 2013 Act and this Court has not opined on the merits of the same and the same would be considered independently in accordance with law.

Order accordingly.

********