Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.— Petitioner has challenged the demand notices asking him to pay Rs. 71,27,604/- towards the principal amount and Rs. 47,41,885/- towards interest upto 11.07.2013, failing which coercive measures are sought to be taken against him under the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887. 2. The case set up by the petitioner is that he had purchased 34/72 share to the extent of 09 Kanals 09 Marias land comprised in Khewat/Khatoni No. 54/60, Khasra No. 14//13 Min(2-17), 18Min (7-4), 22/2(3-8), 23min (6-12), total measuring 20 Kanals 01 Maria, situated in village Jheorheri, Hadbast No. 253, Tehsil and District Mohali, from respondent nos.6 to 13, for a sum of Rs. 37,50,000/- vide sale deed/Vasika No. 1808 dated 01.10.2007, on the basis of which mutation No. 842 was sanctioned in his favour and entry is made in the Jamabandi issued on 20.03.2008. It is alleged that the Government of Punjab issued notification dated 04.02.2008 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") for acquisition of the land situated at village Jheorheri. The land of the petitioner, purchased vide sale deed dated 01.10.2007, was also acquired. After the award was announced, the petitioner was paid Rs. 1,77,53,104/- as compensation. On 14.05.2013, the Deputy Commissioner, Mohali, summoned the petitioner through SDM, Mohali, and informed him that out of 9 Kanal 9 Marias of land, 4 Kanals land was already acquired vide notification dated 20.05.1968 issued under Section 6 of the Act for the Indian Air Force and the compensation was paid to the owners, therefore, the amount of Rs. 71,27,604/- has been paid in excess to the petitioner for the land which was not acquired. The petitioner was asked to return the said amount. It is further averred that due to undue pressure created by the official respondents, the petitioner paid Rs. 21,24,604/- vide cheque No. 033397 dated 14.05.2013 drawn on the HDFC Bank and undertook to pay a sum of Rs. 50,00,000/- within a period of 45 days. Thereafter, the petitioner paid Rs. 25,00,000/- by way of demand draft dated 03.08.2013 and also gave two post dated cheques for Rs. 12,50,000/- each, one dated 01.09.2013 and the another dated 01.10.2013. 21,24,604/- vide cheque No. 033397 dated 14.05.2013 drawn on the HDFC Bank and undertook to pay a sum of Rs. 50,00,000/- within a period of 45 days. Thereafter, the petitioner paid Rs. 25,00,000/- by way of demand draft dated 03.08.2013 and also gave two post dated cheques for Rs. 12,50,000/- each, one dated 01.09.2013 and the another dated 01.10.2013. The petitioner has alleged that he has been unnecessarily harassed by the official respondents and is being threatened to be proceeded against in terms of provisions of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, and are illegally demanding the interest of Rs. 47,41,885/-. Thus, he has prayed for quashing of the demand notices and, in the meantime, staying its operation. 3. After going through the petition, since I had a strong hunch that the petitioner is concealing something from the Court, therefore, counsel for the State was orally asked, without issuing notice to him, to produce the record of the acquisition proceedings when the land was acquired in the year 1968 for the Indian Air Force and when it was brought to the notice of the petitioner that he has taken compensation of the land which has already been acquired in the year 1968. 4. Shri V. Ramswaroop, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, has informed this Court that the land measuring 17 Kanals 11 Marias, comprised in Khasra Nos. 14/13/1/1 (1-13), 18/2/1 (3-08), 23/1/1 (3-0), 16/3/2/1 (2-12), 8/2/1 (2- 02), 27/3/2/1 (0-8), 16/3/1/2 (1-16), 18/2/1 (1-8), 23/1/2 (1-0), 52/1/1 (0-2) and 138/1 (0-2), situated in village Jheorheri, the then Tehsil Kharar and District Ropar, now Tehsil and District SAS Nagar Mohali, was acquired for Defence installation by Defence Department and notification to that effect was issued under Section 4 of the Act in April 1968 followed by notification under Section 6 of the Act dated 20.05.1968. The land was acquired and the award was announced on 13.02.1969 and the compensation was paid to the erstwhile owners but inadvertently, mutation of the acquired land was not entered in the name of the Defence Department and the entries regarding this land continued in the name of previous owners. 5. The acquired land was owned by one Gurbax Singh S/o Karam Singh S/o Hira Singh, falling in Khasra Nos.14//13/1 (1-13), 18/2/1(3-08), 23/1/1(3-0), measuring 8 Kanals 01 Maria. After the acquisition of the said land, possession was taken. 5. The acquired land was owned by one Gurbax Singh S/o Karam Singh S/o Hira Singh, falling in Khasra Nos.14//13/1 (1-13), 18/2/1(3-08), 23/1/1(3-0), measuring 8 Kanals 01 Maria. After the acquisition of the said land, possession was taken. Gurbax Singh expired on 07.04.1985 and the mutation of inheritance was sanctioned in favour of Ajmer Singh, Ujagar Singh, both sons of Gurbax Singh and Gurmeet Kaur widow, Rand-hir Singh son and Paramjit Kaur daughter of Gur-dayal Singh S/o Gurbax Singh, to the extent of l/3rd share each vide mutation No. 751 dated 29.11.2002. The legal heirs of Gurbax Singh sold 9 Kanals 09 Marias of land (including 3 Kanals 16 Marias of land for which compensation was already received by Gurbax Singh) to the petitioner vide sale deed dated 01.10.2007 against a consideration of Rs. 37,50,000/-. 6. When the land was acquired for International Civil Terminal, the above said Khasra Numbers of the land measuring 17 Kanals 11 Marias were again included in the notifications under Sections 4 & 6 of the Act issued on 04.02.2008 and 09.03.2008 respectively and the award No. 33 dated 09.04.2008 was announced. On account of the acquisition of the land of the petitioner, compensation of Rs. 1,77,53,104/- was paid to him. As soon as it came to the notice of the official respondents that the petitioner has been paid compensation of the land which already belonged to the government, demand notice dated 12.07.2013was issued for a sum of Rs. 97,41,885/- including interest @ 10.5% per annum from 21.04.2008 to 11.07.2013. 7. After receiving notice, the petitioner gave a cheque amounting to Rs. 21,27,604/- dated 14.05.2013 and also filed a Civil Suit for permanent injunction for restraining the respondents from recovering the amount but his application for temporary injunction was dismissed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division). SAS Nagar on 31.07.2013 and subsequently the suit was withdrawn by him on 24.08.2013. However, this fact has been concealed from this Court as it is not mentioned in the writ petition. 8. Thereafter, the petitioner paid Rs. 25,00,000/- by way of Demand Draft No. 001065 dated 05.08.2013 drawn on HDFC Bank and also gave two post dated cheques amounting to ? 12,50,0007- each. As a matter of fact, he has paid Rs. 71,27,604/-. However, this fact has been concealed from this Court as it is not mentioned in the writ petition. 8. Thereafter, the petitioner paid Rs. 25,00,000/- by way of Demand Draft No. 001065 dated 05.08.2013 drawn on HDFC Bank and also gave two post dated cheques amounting to ? 12,50,0007- each. As a matter of fact, he has paid Rs. 71,27,604/-. It is submitted by the counsel for the State that the petitioner filed the Civil Suit on 01.06.2013. It is also submitted by him that the above mentioned land which has been acquired again vide notification dated 09.04.2008 has been de- notified by the Department of Civil Aviation (Transport-3 Branch), Punjab, vide notification No. 4/1/2008- 4T(3)/79877 dated 29.07.2013 measuring 126 Kanals 18 Marias. 9. As a matter of fact, the excess amount of compensation taken by the petitioner on account of the land which has already been acquired has been re-paid by him in short intervals, as narrated here-in-above, and the remaining amount of interest charged @ 10.5% per annum on account of the fact that he had used the government money for 5 years and did not disclose it to the authorities himself till it was discovered is justified because the petitioner must have generated this much of interest in the last 5 years on the amount which has been illegally retained by him, which belongs to the Government and has to be repaid by him. Insofar as the remedy of the petitioner is concerned, he is always free to file the suit for recovery against his vendors who have duped him by concealing the fact that the land, which was sold to him, was not free from encumbrances and it had already been acquired against which the compensation was received by the predecessor-sin- interest of the vendors. The petitioner may proceed against his vendors in accordance with law and insofar as the recovery of the government/public money is concerned, that has to be paid by him and for that matter I do not find any error in the action of the official respondents. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the present writ petition is hereby dismissed being denuded of any merit.