IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.

LPA No. 55 of 2021 Decided on: November 1, 2023 ________________________________________________________ State of H.P. and another ……….. Appellants Versus .

Bihari Lal and another Respondents ________________________________________________________

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting? ¹ Yes.

For the Appellants : Mr. Anoop Rattan, Advocate General w ith Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, Additional Advocate General.

For the respondents : Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vivek Negi, Advocate vice Ms. Shweta Joolka, o Advocate.

________________________________________________________

Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral)

Instant Letters Patent Appeal filed under Clause-10 of the Letters Patent of Delhi High court Act as applicable to the High Court of Himachal Pradesh lays challenge to judgment dated 26.7.2018 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in CWP No. 7488 of 2012, titled Bihari Lal and another v. State of Himachal Pradesh and another, wherein direction came to be issued to the appellants to initiate acquisition proceedings qua the land detailed in the petition and pay compensation in terms of the Land Acquisition Act.

2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that the predecessor-in-interest of the writ petitioners namely Sita Ram was owner of land comprised in old Khasra No. 1824 (new 1654), old Khasra Nos. 1817, 1818/2, 1819 and 1820 (new 1655) in Khewat No.

1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

405, Khatauni No. 450 in Mohal Badsar, Mauza Pajgrahan, Tehsil Badsar, District Hamirpur, as per Bandobast Jadid for the year 2009- 2010. Respondents, without acquiring the aforesaid land of the writ petitioners, forcibly constructed /repaired the link road. Since despite repeated requests, no steps were taken for acquisition of the land and no compensation was paid, writ petitioners approached this Court by way of writ petition filed under Art. o226 of the Constitution of India, praying therein to issue direction to the appellants to acquire the land of the writ petitioners to the extent, same has been utilized for the purpose of link road namely Badsar-Jabbal-Kheriyan and grant compensation under the Land Acquisition Act at market rate.

3. Pursuant to notices issued in the afore petition filed by the writ petitioners, respondents filed reply and attempted to refute the claim of the writ petitioners on the ground that they have nothing to do with the land of the writ petitioners because no part thereof was ever utilized by them for any purpose much less for construction of road.

4. Writ petitioners, by filing rejoinder successfully proved on record H the factum with regard to their being owners qua the land utilized by the appellants for the construction of link road in question.

5. Learned Single Judge, having taken note of the Bandobast Jadid for the years 2009-10, wherein land has been shown to be belonging to the writ petitioners as well as Jamabandi for the years 1991-92, Field Book, prima facie found the writ petitioners to be owners of the land utilized for the construction of road and as such, directed the appellants to initiate acquisition proceedings qua the land utilized for the construction of road.

6. Precise case of the appellants, as has been highlighted in the appeal and further canvassed by Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, learned Additional Advocate General is that the road with total length from KM 0/0 to 5/465 in Mohal Jabbal was constructed under NABA.RD Scheme for the year 2007-08 and formation and cutting work of the road had already been done by local Panchayat through Block Development Office, Bijhri during the years 1981-82. While fairly admitting the fact of ownership of the land of the writ petitioners in the stretch RD 5/300 to 4/600, it has been claimed on behalf of the appellants that cutting through aforesaid portion was