Dhanpati vs. The State Of Haryana

COURT NO.16

SECTION IV-B

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 10079-10080/2020

BALJIT SINGH & ORS.

Petitioner(s)

Respondent(s)

VERSUS

THE STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

DEFAULT IN ONLY SLP(C) REPORT ON (OFFICE No. $10470 -$ 10471/2020, SLP(C) No. 10423- 10424/2020, SLP(C) No.10414-10415/2020 <pre>,SLP(C) No.10325-10326/2020, SLP(C) No. 10275-10276/2020, SLP(C)<br>No. 10441- 10442/2020 , SLP(C) No. 10256-10257/2020, SLP(C)</pre> No.11680-11686/2020 TO BE LISTED BEFORE HONBLE COURT IN CHAMBER IA No. 101350/2020 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE SPARE COPIES IA No. 93947/2020 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 93945/2020 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES

IA No. 82116/2020 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

WITH

SLP(C) No. $10275-10276/2020$ (IV-B)

SLP(C) No. 11680-11686/2020 (IV-B)

SLP(C) No. 10423-10424/2020 (IV-B)

SLP(C) No. 10325-10326/2020 (IV-B)

SLP(C) No. 10414-10415/2020 (IV-B)

SLP(C) No. $10470-10471/2020$ (IV-B)

SLP(C) No. 10441-10442/2020 (IV-B)

SLP(C) No. $10256-10257/2020$ (IV-B)

Date: 21-04-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today.

$AM:$

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL [IN CHAMBER]

For Petitioner(s)

Mr. Karan Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Manik Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Shubham Bhalla, AOR Mr. Ashutosh Ghade, AOR

For Respondent(s)

Dr. Monika Gusain, AOR

M/S. Arputham Aruna And Co, AOR Mrs. Paramjeet Benipal, Adv. Mr. Avneesh Arputham, Adv. Ms. Anuradha Arputham, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R

As per office report, learned counsel for the petitioners has not filed spare copies for service on the unserved respondents.

Learned counsel counsel for the petitioners submitted that it is a bunch of around 70 (Seventy) matters. The High Court had also decided the same by a common judgment. The compensation, on account of acquisition of land, was reduced. The land owners are before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation. The contesting respondents are State of Haryana, District Revenue Officer cum Land Acquisition Collector, Panipat Haryana and Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., for the benefit of whose, the land was acquired. The contesting respondents are already represented and hence, their service in all petitions is deemed complete.

As far as the private respondents are concerned, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that they were the land owners/appellants before the High Court. No relief as such has been claimed against them and hence, their service can be dispensed with. Ordered accordingly.

As the matter is complete regarding service, let the same be processed for listing before the Court.

(BABITA PANDEY) (MALEKAR NAGARAJ) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER (NSH)