Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHARMA
Krishan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sandeep Sharma, J.
Since despite there being utilization of the land of the petitioner for construction of “Chamaru Jachli Mathaik road”, petitioner has not been paid compensation by the department after acquiring the land, he has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying therein for the following main reliefs:
“(a) Writ of certiorari may kindly be issued against the office order dated 17.01.2023, annexure P-7 and the office order dated 17.01.2023 may be set aside and quashed in the facts and circumstances stated in the petition.
(b) Writ of mandamus may kindly be issued to the respondents to initiate acquisition proceeding qua the land of the petitioner used for the construction of road i.e. Chamaru Jachli link road denoted byKhasra No. 45/1, situated at Mohal Chamaru, Tehsil Jubbal, District Shimla, HP as reflected in Jamabandi Annexure P-1.”
2. Precisely, the facts of the case as emerge from the record are that the land of the petitioner denoted by Khasra No. 45/1, situate at Mohal Chamaru, Tehsil Jubbal, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, came to be utilized for the construction of “Chamaru Jachli Mathai
Landowners are entitled to due process and compensation for property utilized by the State without formal acquisition, as under Article 300A of the Constitution.
Landowners cannot be deprived of their property without due process and just compensation, regardless of implied consent due to prolonged silence on compensation claims.
The right to property is a constitutional right under Article 300-A, and deprivation without due process is violative of human rights.
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.
Forcible dispossession of property without due process violates constitutional rights; delay and laches are not applicable in cases of continuing cause of action.
The right to property under Article 300-A mandates compensation for land acquisition, and the State cannot deprive landowners of their property without due process and compensation.
(1) State cannot shield itself behind ground of delay and laches in such a situation – There cannot be a limitation to doing justice.(2) Acquisition of land – Nobody can be deprived of liberty or pro....
Welfare State cannot deprive property without due process and compensation under Article 300A; cannot plead adverse possession or delay against owners seeking payment for land used in public road con....
The court held that delay does not negate the right to compensation for property unlawfully appropriated by the State, emphasizing the need for due process and just compensation under established law....
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
