JUDGMENT Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral):- This application has been filed with a prayer to review an order dated 21.3.2011, passed in CWP No.5642 of 1990 by this Court. 2. To seek review, it has been stated that in other cases, the land qua which, the writ petitions were dismissed, was lying vacant, whereas in the land owned by the petitioner, measuring 1 bigha 4 biswa, Water Treatment Plant was in existence. To authenticate above said fact, reference was made to the averments contained in paragraph No.7 of the writ petition, wherein it has been so stated. 3. After hearing counsel for the applicant, we feel that no case is made out for review, as prayed in this application. 4. As per the record that matter was argued on 21.3.2011 by Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate. Mr.Avinash Chander Jain, Advocate, through whom this application has been filed, as per record, did not appear at that time. However, he says that he was present. On perusal of record, we find that even power of attorney of Mr.Avinash Chander Jain is not on the file. 5. Be that as it may, it is apparent from the record that in paragraph No.7 it is stated by the petitioner that it had installed a water treatment plant in the land under acquisition. However, on record, there is no demarcation report to show that, in which, part of the land owned by the petitioner, the said treatment plant is in existence. To show the above said fact, photographs were also not put on record. In the written statement filed, it is specifically stated by the respondents as under:- “2. That in reply to para No.2 of the Civil Writ Petition, it is submitted that the petitioner is the owner of the land mentioned in the said para. The land mentioned in the said para was notified u/s 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. Thereafter, a declaration u/s 6 of the Land Acquisition Act was published in accordance with law and the said declaration included an area measuring 1B-4B of khasra no.614 only. Rest of the land was left out of acquisition. The land which was left out of acquisition had a factory over it and the same constituted one single constructed block and was therefore left out of acquisition. The land measuring 1B-4B of khasra No.614 village Khandsa, distt. Gurgaon which is under acquisition was completely vacant. Rest of the land was left out of acquisition. The land which was left out of acquisition had a factory over it and the same constituted one single constructed block and was therefore left out of acquisition. The land measuring 1B-4B of khasra No.614 village Khandsa, distt. Gurgaon which is under acquisition was completely vacant. There was no construction over the land under acquisition. The allegation of the petitioner that there is a running factory over the land in dispute is wrong and hence denied.” 6. In reply, it is clearly stated that the petitioner was owner of land measuring 4 bigha 14 biswa, taking note of objections filed under Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, the Act), constructed portion of the factory measuring 3 bigha 10 biswa was kept out of acquisition and acquisition was ordered only qua 1 bigha 4 biswa of land, which was lying vacant. In paragraph Nos.6, 7, 8 and 15, it is repeatedly stated that when notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued, land measuring 1 bigha 4 biswa under acquisition, which is part of khasra No.614, was lying vacant. Reply was filed in the month of September 1990. During the period of 20 years, to controvert the averments made in the written statement, replication was not filed. There is no evidence to show that the water treatment plant was in existence in the land under acquisition, which clearly indicates that a false plea was taken by the applicant to save its land. Otherwise also, we have seen the site plan, the land under acquisition, shown in Yellow colour, can easily be amalgamated in the Scheme. 7. Under the circumstances, we feel that this application is frivolous and has unnecessarily been filed. Dismissed with costs of Rs.5000/- to be deposited with the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee within one month from today, failing which, the Officer shall initiate the necessary recovery proceedings. -----------------