ZILE SINGH v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER
Case Details
1 CWP-11223-2023 (O&M) CWP 162 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-11223-2023 (O&M) (O&M) September 22, 2025 Date of Decision: September 22, 2025 Date of Decision: ZILE SINGH ........Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE
Legal Reasoning
HARKESH MANUJA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Chanderhas Yadav, Advocate for the Mr. Chanderhas Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jagdish Manchanda, Addl. A.G. Haryana. Mr. Jagdish Manchanda, Addl. A.G. Haryana. Mr. Jagdish Manchanda, Addl. A.G. Haryana. HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) HARKESH MANUJA **** way of present writ petition, prayer has been made on By way of present writ petition, prayer has been made on way of present writ petition, prayer has been made on By landowner for release of statutory interest in his behalf of the petitioner-landowner for release of statutory interest in his landowner for release of statutory interest in his behalf of the petitioner favour on account of delayed disbursal of the compensation amount in favour on account of delayed disbursal of the compensation amount in favour on account of delayed disbursal of the compensation amount in favour on account of delayed disbursal of the compensation amount in n Collector, terms of award dated 04.07.2014 passed by Land Acquisition Collector, terms of award dated 04.07.2014 passed by Land Acquisitio terms of award dated 04.07.2014 passed by Land Acquisitio Urban Estate, Department, Rohtak. Urban Estate, Department, Rohtak. 2. Briefly stating, certain land owned by the petitioner, situated Briefly stating, certain land owned by the petitioner, situated Briefly stating, certain land owned by the petitioner, situated Briefly stating, certain land owned by the petitioner, situated Jhajjar, District Jhajjar came to be in the revenue estate of Village Jhajjar, District Jhajjar came to be Jhajjar, District Jhajjar came to be in the revenue estate of acquired vide notifications dated 07.07.2011 and 06.07.2012 issued acquired vide notifications dated 07.07.2011 and 06.07.2012 issued acquired vide notifications dated 07.07.2011 and 06.07.2012 issued acquired vide notifications dated 07.07.2011 and 06.07.2012 issued r Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter r Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter r Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘1894 Act’). Award under Section 11 of the Act was referred to as ‘1894 Act’). Award under Section 11 of the Act was referred to as ‘1894 Act’). Award under Section 11 of the Act was referred to as ‘1894 Act’). Award under Section 11 of the Act was landowner announced on 04.07.2014. In the meanwhile, the petitioner-landowner announced on 04.07.2014. In the meanwhile, the petitioner announced on 04.07.2014. In the meanwhile, the petitioner eme. The factum applied for grant of benefits under the Land Pooling Scheme. The factum applied for grant of benefits under the Land Pooling Sch applied for grant of benefits under the Land Pooling Sch landowner under the Land Pooling Scheme of entitlement of petitioner-landowner under the Land Pooling Scheme landowner under the Land Pooling Scheme of entitlement of petitioner was even acknowledged by the LAC in the award. However, factually the was even acknowledged by the LAC in the award. However, factually the was even acknowledged by the LAC in the award. However, factually the was even acknowledged by the LAC in the award. However, factually the landowner as their land said benefit was not available to the petitioner-landowner as their land said benefit was not available to the petitioner said benefit was not available to the petitioner TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.09.25 23:45 I agree to specified portions of this document 2 CWP-11223-2023 (O&M) was acquired for the purpose of development of Sector 10, Jhajjar which was in fact institutional and commercial. 3. This fact was never brought to the notice of the petitioner- landowner. As such, they went on waiting for the grant of benefits under the Land Pooling Scheme. It was only on 22.06.2022, the petitioner was released the benefit of compensation under the Award dated 04.07.2014 and were made aware of the fact that the benefit under the Land Pooling Scheme was not available to them. In such circumstances, the petitioner claims award of statutory interest in terms of Section 34 of 1894 Act for the period between 04.07.2014 and 22.06.2022. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there was no delay on the part of the respondents towards the release of compensation amount as the petitioner-landowner had applied for the grant of benefit under the Land Pooling Scheme and as soon as those applications were withdrawn, the amount of compensation under the award was released to them on 22.06.2022. It was thus,
Decision
prayed that the writ petition was liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. 6. Undisputedly, the land under the present case was acquired for setting up of Sector 10 Jhajjar (Institutional and Commercial) and in such circumstances, the Land Pooling Scheme was not applicable to such acquisition. In fact, the landowner was treated in an unfair manner by the respondents. The petitioner was made to apply under the Land Pooling Policy which was not at all applicable to him, however, compensation amount was wrongly withheld. Moreover, it has not been TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.09.25 23:45 I agree to specified portions of this document 3 CWP-11223-2023 (O&M) disputed that the possession of the land was taken over from the landowner-petitioner as on the date of passing of the award itself. 7. In such circumstances, the fault lies with the respondents for delaying the disbursal of compensation amount in favour of petitioner- landowner for no justified reasons. Moreover, the issue in hand has already been discussed in detail by this Court in CWP-27766-2018 decided on 11.09.2025. Relevant paragraph Nos.9 and 9.1 are extracted hereunder:- 9. Furthermore, the award in the present case was passed on 04.07.2014 and the possession of the acquired land was taken there and then by the respondents, however, the payment was released in favour of the petitioners on 27.12.2017. Initially, the compensation was not released in favour of the petitioners as they had applied for the benefit under the Land Pooling Scheme in terms of the specific stipulation made in the award dated 04.07.2014 by the LAC. As per annexure P-4, the petitioners were communicated only on 05.07.2017 that the Land Pooling Scheme was not applicable to the present acquisition which was carried out for carving Sector 10, Jhajjar for public utilities and commercial sector. As per the records, it was thereafter only on 27.12.2017, the compensation amount was released in favour of petitioners/ landowners as per award dated 04.07.2011. 9.1 Apparently, on account of specific stipulation been made in the award dated 04.07.2014 by the LAC about offering of the benefit of land pooling to the landowners, the respondents misguided and misrepresented them for making them applying under the Land Pooling Scheme and thereafter remained sitting tight on such applications for years together without responding or without even reverting that the said policy was not applicable to the present acquisition proceedings. In such circumstances, the delay in disbursal of compensation in favour of the landowners is purely attributable to the respondents and thus they are found obligated to pay interest to the landowners/petitioners from the date of award i.e. 04.07.2014 till the date of actual release of payment i.e. 27.12.2017, in accordance with Section 34 of the Act. TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.09.25 23:45 I agree to specified portions of this document 4 8. CWP-11223-2023 (O&M) In view of the aforesaid, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of judgment passed by this Court in CWP-27766-2018 decided on 11.09.2025. Accordingly, the petitioner shall be entitled for release of statutory interest under Section 34 of 1894 Act, from the date of award till the date of disbursement of compensation amount. It is further directed that the needful be done within two months from today else, respondent No.2 shall be liable to pay cost of Rs.50,000/- to the petitioner towards delay as well as cost on account of unnecessary and uncalled for litigation. 9. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 22.09.2025 Tejwinder (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable Yes/No Yes/No TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.09.25 23:45 I agree to specified portions of this document