ORDER :

The grievance projected by the petitioner in the instant petition is that land owned by him comprised in Khasra Nos. 180 and 288 situated at Mauja Chalhog, Tehsil and District Shimla has been utilized by the respondents for construction of Ganahatti-Nalhatti-Arki road, however, no compensation in lieu of the same has been paid to him.

2. The case set up by the petitioner is that:-

2(i) A notification under Section 4 of Himachal Pradesh Road Infrastructure (Protection) Act, 2002 was issued by the respondents on 7.12.2006. At serial No. 6 of the notification was the Ganahatti-Arki road for construction of which various parcels of land were to be utilized by the respondents. Khasra Nos. 170, 177, 288 and 180 belonging to Mauza Chalhog figured at serial Nos. 26, 27, 29 and 31 under Ganahatti-Arki road in this notification.

2(ii) The land in question falls in the alignment of the road, however, it has not been acquired. No compensation qua the land utilized by the respondents-State for the construction of road in question was paid to the owners. Khasra Nos. 170 and 177 also falling in the road alignment were co-owned by the petitioner alongwith one Shri Rameshwar Lal. Said Rameshwar Lal instituted a civil suit for mandatory injunction against the State of Himachal Pradesh in respect of Khasra Nos. 170 and 177 in the year 2005. The respondents-State assured the plaintiff therein that notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act in respect of suit land i.e. Khasra Nos. 170 and 177 was going to be issued shortly. On the basis of this assurance, the civil suit was withdrawn by the plaintiff Rameshwar Lal on 13.3.2006. The order dated 13.3.2006 dismissing the suit filed by Rameshwar Lal as withdrawn reads as under:

“Two witnesses present and examined. The plaintiff vide his separate statement recorded has stated in view of the statement deposed by PW-1 and PW-2 that proceeding before LAO of the suit land is pending and notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act is going to be notified. Due to this reason he does not want to proceed with this case and prayed that it be dismissed as withdrawn. In view of the statement of the plaintiff, this suit is dismissed as withdrawn. File after due completion be consigned to record room.”

2(iii) Subsequently, acquisition proceedings were initiated by the respondents in respect of Khasra Nos. 170 and 177. Award No. 55/2011 was passed on 30.9.2011 under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act for these two Khasra numbers. Petitioner as well as Rameshwar Lal i.e the co-owners were compensated for acquisition of these two khasra Nos. i.e. 170 and 177.

2(iv) On 21.2.2012, the petitioner represented to the respondents that Khasra Nos. 180 and 288 exclusively owned by him and situated at Mauza Chalhog, Tehsil and District Shimla have also been utilized by them for the construction of Ganahatti-Nalhatti-Arki road. However, he has not been compensated for this land. Getting no response, the petitioner got issued legal notices to the respondents on 19.3.2013 and 10.5.2013. He also exchanged correspondence with the concerned officials of the respondent department with respect to acquisition of his land comprised in Khasra Nos. 180 and 288 total measuring 0-04-53 hectares. The response given by the respondents was that though the road has been constructed over the land in question, however, the same has not been acquired, therefore, no compensation can be paid to the petitioner for want of acquisition of the land i.e. Khasra Nos. 180 and 288.

3. It is in the above background that the petitioner has preferred instant petition praying for following substantive reliefs:

“ ii) That appropriate order and directions may be issued in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents that since they have utilized the land of the petitioner as entered against Khasra Nos. 180 as well as 288 situated at Mauja Chalhog, Tehsil and District Shimla, therefore, appropriate legal proceedings be init