Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
G.S. SANDHAWALIA, C.J., RANJAN SHARMA
State of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Heera Singh (since deceased) through his LRs-Sita Ram – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice
Challenge in the present Letters Patent Appeal is against the order passed by Learned Single Judge in Civil Writ Petition No.1128 of 2023, decided on 29.08.2023, whereby learned Single Judge directed that acquisition be made for the land in question, which was required for construction of the road, keeping in view the mandate under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India.
2. The learned Single Judge has relied upon the judgments of Apex Court in State of Maharashtra v. Digambar, (1995) 4 SCC 683 and Vidya Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, (2020) 2 SCC 569 and Sukh Dutt Ratra v. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, (2022) 7 SCC 508, by noticing that the land of the petitioner stands utilized for construction of road two decades back but till date, petitioner has not been paid any amount. Reliance has also been placed upon the judgments of Apex Court in State of Himachal Pradesh v. Umed Ram Sharma (1986) 2 SCC 68 and Hari Krishna Mandir Trust v. State of Maharashtra and others, (2020) 9 SCC 356 to grant the relief.
3. Contention of counsel for the State that there is delay in approaching this Court and therefore, learned Single J
Landowners are entitled to compensation for land utilized for public purposes unless there is clear evidence of voluntary surrender, as mandated by Article 300-A of the Constitution.
The court affirmed that landowners are entitled to compensation under Article 300A when their land is utilized for public purposes without proper acquisition procedures.
Landowners cannot be deprived of property rights without lawful authority, and the burden of proof lies with the State to demonstrate voluntary donation of land.
The State must compensate landowners for land used in public projects without formal acquisition, emphasizing the necessity of due process.
The court ruled that landowners are entitled to compensation for land utilized for public projects without proper acquisition, emphasizing constitutional rights and the invalidity of claims of volunt....
Landowners have a constitutional right to compensation for land utilized for public projects, and claims cannot be dismissed based on implied consent or delay in seeking redress.
The right to property is a constitutional right under Article 300-A, and deprivation without due process is violative of human rights.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
