Forcible dispossession of property without due process violates constitutional rights; delay and laches are not applicable in cases of continuing cause of action.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Sharma, J.

Petitioners herein are compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings on account of the fact that though respondents used their land comprised in Khasra No.230, 241, 240 146, 159/1, 141 and 128 in Mauza Shihardi Chamara and in Khasra No.41, 51 and 59 of Mauza Sihardi Kolian, Tehsil Kasauli, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, for construction of link road from ‘Dharampur Senior Secondary School to Shihardi Chamara, Shiharadi Kolian, Tehsil Kasauli, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh’ and laying of water pipelines alongside the road, however, fact remains that till date, no compensation has been paid and as such, petitioners have approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying therein for following main relief:-

“i. By issuing writ of mandamus or a writ of similar nature directing the respondents to stop laying down of the water pipelines nearby houses of the petitioners village and to seek another option for laying pipes on other spots as suggested by villagers.

ii. By issuing writ of mandamus or a writ of similar nature directing the respondents to acquire the land of the petitioner situated in Khasra No. 230, 241, 240 146, 159/1, 141 and 128 in Mauza Shihardi Chamara and in Khasra No. 41,51 and 59 of Mauza Sihardi Kolian, Tehsil Kasauli, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh Annexure P-1.

iii. By issuing writ of mandamus or a writ of similar nature directing the respondents to acquire the land of the petitioner prior to the laying down of water pipe line and pay compensation to the petitioner in accordance with the appropriate provisions of law.”

2. Precisely, the facts of the case as emerge from the record are that the land of the petitioners comprised in Khasra No.230, 241, 240, 146, 159/1, 141 and 128 situate in Mauza Shihardi Chamara and land in Khasra No.41, 51 and 59 of Mauza Sihardi Kolian, Tehsil Kasauli, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, firstly came to be utilized for construction of road in the year 1996-97 and thereafter water pipeline was laid by Jal Shakti Vibhag for providing drinking water to the villagers in the year 2021, but since neither the land of the petitioners was acquired nor any compensation was paid to them by the respondents, they have approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to initiate acquisition proceedings qua the land of the petitioners and thereafter pay compensation, as per law.

3. Pursuant to notices issued in the instant proceedings, respondents have filed the reply, wherein facts, as have been noticed hereinabove, are not in dispute. Precisely, the claim of the petitioners, as has been raised in the petition, has been refuted by the respondents on the ground that present petition is barred by delay and laches since it has been filed after a lapse of 29 years. Besides above, it has also been averred in the reply filed by the respondents that land in question has been utilized for public welfare i.e. for construction of road and laying of pipeline for providing drinking water to 17 Gram Panchayats covering as many as 179 villages and a population of 57,963 persons including the petitioners.

4. Mr. Sudhir Thakur, learned Senior Counsel representing the petitioners, duly assisted by Mr. Somesh Sharma, Advocate, vehemently argued that once it is not in dispute that land of the petitioners stands utilized for construction of road and laying of pipelines, respondents cannot escape from their liability to pay the compensation. Mr. Thakur specifically invited attention of this Court to resolution of villagers dated 26.01.2024 (Annexure P-4), as per which, villagers protested qua laying of pipelines in abadi of the village. While placing heavy reliance upon the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Vidya Devi v. State of HP and Ors, 2020 (2) SCC 569 and Sukh Dutt Ratra and Anr v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors, 2022 (7) SCC 508, Mr. Thakur, arg