Smt. Durgi vs Unknown
2021 Latest Caselaw 4835 HP

                                      1




    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

                  ON THE 1st DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021
                                  BEFORE




                                                            .

           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR

                EXECUTION PETITION NO.169 OF 2021





    Between:-
    1.   SMT. DURGI
         W/O LATE SH. HARI SINGH ALIAS





         HARIMAN, AGE ABOUT 71 YEARS,
         R/O VILLAGE JAIOR,
         POST OFFICE JAMLA,
         TEHSIL SUNDERNAGAR,
         DISTRICT MANDI, HIMACHAL PRADESH.
    2.

         SH. JAI PRAKASH
         S/O LATE SH. HARIMAN,

         R/O VILLAGE JAIOR,
         POST OFFICE JAMLA,
         TEHSIL SUNDERNAGAR,
         DISTRICT MANDI, HIMACHAL PRADESH.
                                                             .....PETITIONERS


         (BY SH.DEVENDER KUMAR SHARMA,
         ADVOCATE VICE SH.CHANDERAYAN
         SINGH, ADVOCATE)




         AND





    1.   STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
         THROUGH SECRETARY (PWD) TO THE
         GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
         SHIMLA.





    2.   DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
         MANDI, DISTRICT MANDI,
         HIMACHAL PRADESH.

    3.   SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE,
         SUNDERNAGAR, DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.

                                                            ...RESPONDENTS
         (BY SH.DINESH THAKUR, ADDITIONAL
         ADVOCATE GENERAL)

         Whether approved for reporting?




                                           ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:09:32 :::CIS
                                            2


                      This execution petition coming on for orders this day,
    the Court passed the following:

                                        ORDER

.

Response/compliance affidavit stands filed indicating

that judgment dated 05.07.2016, passed by this Court in CWP

No.3760 of 2009, titled as Smt. Durgi vs. State of Himachal

Pradesh and others, stands complied with.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners endorses the

compliance, however, he submits that petitioners are not

satisfied with the amount of compensation.

3. Be that as it may, order for acquiring the land stands

complied with and petitioners are at liberty to avail appropriate

remedy with respect to the compensation which is not subject

matter of the present execution petition, in accordance with law.

4. Considering aforesaid submissions, present petition

is closed and disposed of.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

(Vivek Singh Thakur),

Judge.

October 1, 2021 (Purohit)