Sukhdarshan Singh vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Others

Ajay Mohan Goel, J

By way of this petition, petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:­

"i) That the respondents may kindly be directed to produce the entire record pertaining to the case for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court.

(ii) That appropriate orders and directions may kindly be issued, requiring the respondents to pay suitable compensation/damages on account of occupation and use of the land pertaining to the petitioner from the date of actual taking over the possession, initiating the proceedings under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. Time bound directions may kindly be issued to the respondents to initiate the acquisition proceedings to finalize the same and pay the amount of compensation with respect to the land and properties/land/valuable trees as per the rate prevalent in the market alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the acquisition of the land of the petitioners for the purpose of construction of road".

The grievance of the petitioner is that his land comprised in khasra Nos.1790/1780, measuring 0­4 biswas, khasra No.1114, measuring 1­16 bighas, khasra Nos.1795/1145, measuring 0­7 biswas, khasra No.1146, measuring 0­19 biswas, khasra No.1149, 1150, measuring 1­7 bighas, situated at Mauza Narang, Tehsil Pachhad, District Sirmaur, H.P., stands utilized by the State for the purpose of construction of a road commonly known as 'Narant­Wasni Road' and this has been done without acquiring the land in accordance with law nor the petitioner at any stage has given his consent to the State for the purpose of utilization of the said land without compensating him. It is in these circumstances, he has prayed for the reliefs already enumerated hereinabove.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner informs the Court that persons similarly situated as the petitioner have approached this Court and directions stand issued by this Court as is evident from Annexure P­5 appended with this petition, passed by this Court in CWP No.128 of 2003, titled as Mathu Ram Versus State of H.P. and others, decided on 25.07.2007, wherein the State has been directed to do the needful. Stand of the State is that though the factum of the land of the petitioner having been utilized for the purpose of construction of road is not in dispute, however, the same was done with the consent of the petitioner and further, it is an extremely belated plea raised by petitioner because the land of the petitioner stood utilized as far back as in the year 1980. On these counts, the State submits that the petitioner is not entitled for the relief, prayed for. Learned Additional Advocate General further submits that the State has preferred Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment passed by learned Single Judge of this Court, wherein directions stand issued to the State for the purpose of acquisition of the land.

I have heard learned learned Counsel for the parties and have also gone through the pleadings as well as documents appended therewith.

As it is not in dispute that the land of the petitioner stood utilized by the State without acquiring the same in accordance with law, in my considered view, the State is legally bound to compensate the petitioner for the same. As far as the issue of the petitioner approaching the Court at a belated stage is concerned, Hon'ble Supreme Court in numerable judgments has held that the State cannot deny the benefit to the land owners simply by taking the plea of delays and latches.

As far as contention of learned Additional Advocate General that the land of the petitioner was utilized with their consent, there is no material on record to demonstrate that either the land was gifted by the petitioner in favour of the Government or any written consent was obtained by the authorities concerned before utilizing the land for the purpose concerned.

Therefore, in these circumstances, in my considered view, the State cannot run away from its responsibility of compensating the petitioner for utilization of their land for construction of the road in accordance with law.

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the direction that steps be initiated by the State for the purpose of acquisition of the land of the petitioner within one month from today and the same be taken to its logical conclusion within six month. Alternatively, the State will be at liberty to hand back the possession of the land of the petitioner which stands utilized by it for the purpose of construction of the road back to him. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. Interim order, if any, also stands vacated.