SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(HP) 603

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Sureshwar Thakur, Chander Bhusan Barowalia, JJ.
Om Parkash & Anr. - Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Civil Writ Petition No. 2529 of 2020
Decided On : 07-10-2020

Advocates Appeared:
Romesh Verma, Advocate, Hemant Vaid, Advocate, J.S. Guleria, Advocate

The inviolable fundamental right to life and access to roads for residents of hilly areas, and the denial of compensation to landowners for road construction as a breach of constitutional rights.

Headnote:

Mandamus - Road Access - Article 300-A, Article 31 - The court discussed the validity of resistance to the direction for road access, emphasizing the constitutional right to life and access to roads for residents of hilly areas. The court referred to the State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Umed Ram case and highlighted the inviolable fundamental right to life and the denial of compensation to landowners for road construction, emphasizing the breach of constitutional rights.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners sought a mandamus for declaring a road fit for vehicle plying and enabling road communication for the residents. The respondents resisted the declaration, citing policy decisions and landowners' refusal to execute gift deeds.

Finding of the Court:

The court allowed the writ petition, directing the respondents to provide road access to the petitioners and other residents within six months and initiate compensation mechanisms for landowners.

Issues: Validity of resistance to road access, denial of compensation, and breach of constitutional rights.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the inviolable fundamental right to life and access to roads for residents of hilly areas, highlighting the denial of compensation to landowners for road construction as a breach of constitutional rights.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the respondents were directed to provide road access to the petitioners and other residents within six months and initiate compensation mechanisms for landowners.

JUDGMENT

Sureshwar Thakur, J. - The petitioners, seek a mandamus becoming pronounced, upon the respondents, qua, DharampurRajpura road, becoming declared fit, for, plying of vehicles thereon, hence, for enabling the residents, of, the area concerned, to ensure the plying thereon(s), of, HRTC buses, for, theirs thereafter, availing the facility, of, making road communication(s) therefrom. Furthermore, directions are also strived, to be made upon the respondents, for, declaring illegal, and, nonest Annexure P1, (i) wherethrough, the respondents became hence constrained, to, decline, the, making, of, a declaration, visa-vis, afore road being fit, for, plying vehicles, hence thereon, (ii) inasmuch as, completion of the afore road being made, subject to the land owners concerned, whose lands abut the afore link road, commencing from Dharampur-Rajpura, rather executing gift deeds, vis-a-vis, their apposite lands, and, qua the respondents.

2. The respondents, in the reply, meted by them, to the writ petition, also cast therein, the afore objections, for, theirs omitting, to, make, the declaration, as become(s) strived through the extant writ petition. The trite legal conundrum, hence besetting this Court, for, its becoming resolved, through, an adjudication being made thereon, (a) is the validity, of, afore projected resistance qua the rendition, of, the espoused direction, inasmuch as, its hence falling within the domain, and, ambit, of, expostulation(s), of, law, and, within the notion, of, a, beneficent welfare State, hence conceiving, through a special legislation, the peremptory requirement(s), of, acquisition of apposite lands, hence for ensuring qua therethrough, the constitutional mandate(s), enshrined in Article 300-A, and, in Article 31 becoming not breached, and, rather therethroughs becoming enlivened.

3. The Hon'ble Apex Court in a decision, pronounced in case titled, as, State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Umed Ram, (1986) AIR SC 847 , has made thereon, a, declaration, (a) vis-a-vis, the right to life created, through Article 31 of the Constitution of India, embracing not only mere human existence, but also quality of life, and, for residents of hilly areas, the access of road, is, the access to life. Furthermore, it also becomes expostulated therein, that, denial, of, access to road, to the residents of hilly areas, would tantamount to denial to them, of, the constitutionally guaranteed right to life. Consequently, access to roads, vis-a-vis, the residents, of, hilly areas, is, an inbuilt component, of, the constitutionally guaranteed right to life, and, any denial thereof, to the residents of hilly areas, would tantamount, to the, afore constitutionally guaranteed fundamental right to life, hence becoming breached and infringed. In other words, the afore right, is, an inviolable fundamental right, and, does not brook, any, of the afore opposition(s) thereto, as, become projected by the State, nor does withstand any, hence free from compensation, rather, compulsive expropriation, of, land(s), and, properties, of, land owners.

4. Be that as it may, the respondents strived to deny the afore constitutionally guaranteed right to life, inasmuch as, the fundamental right to access to roads, visa-vis, the petitioners, (i) merely, upon a policy decision, becoming taken by them, inasmuch as, the construction of a public road, commencing from Dharampur-Rajpura, becoming unamenable, for completion, (ii) as the petitioners, and, other land owners rather declining to execute gift deeds qua therewith, vis-a-vis, the respondents. The insistences, of, compliance(s), by the apposite respondents, upon, the afore apposite policy decision, as, taken by the respondents, rather by the writ petitioners, does visibly tantamount, to the respondents therethrough, striving to ensure untenable expropriation, of, the private properties, of, those land owners, whose lands abut the afore road, (iii) and, the afore forcible expropriation, as hence strived,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top