Sh. Arun Sharma vs Accordingly
2021 Latest Caselaw 5074 HP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

                ON THE 27th DAY OF OCTOBER 2021




                                                       .

                           BEFORE
         HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA





            CIVIL WRIT PETITION No. 3055 of 2020

    Between:-





 1.     SH. ARUN SHARMA
        S/O LATE SH. OM PRAKASH SHARMA
        R/O DAYAL BHAWAN NEAR

        DURGA SERVICE STATION
        THE MALL ROAD SOLAN,

        TEHSIL AND DISTRICT SOLAN, H.P.

 2.     SMT. SUMAN WD/O LATE SH. ANUP SHARMA,
        R/O DAYAL BHAWAN NEAR



        DURGA SERVICE STATION
        THE MALL ROAD SOLAN,
        TEHSIL AND DISTRICT SOLAN, H.P.




 3.     SH. SHABAD S/O LATE SH. ANUP SHARMA,





        R/O DAYAL BHAWAN NEAR
        DURGA SERVICE STATION
        THE MALL ROAD SOLAN,





        TEHSIL AND DISTRICT SOLAN, H.P.

 4.     MS SIMRAN D/O LATE SH. ANUP SHARMA,
        R/O DAYAL BHAWAN NEAR
        DURGA SERVICE STATION
        THE MALL ROAD SOLAN,
        TEHSIL AND DISTRICT SOLAN, H.P.
                                       .....PETITIONERS
        (BY SH. NARENDER SHARMA, ADVOCATE)

        AND




                                      ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:13:53 :::CIS
                                          2




1.       STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH THROUGH




                                                                    .
         ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SHIMLA, HP-171002.





2.       DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DISTRICT SOLAN, H.P.





3.       SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER (CIVIL) CUM
         COLLECTOR, SOLAN, HP CUM COMPETENT
         AUTHORITY FOR LAND ACQUISITION.

4.       NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,




         RISHIKESH SADAN, SHANTI KUTIYA,
         HOUSE NO. 1, CHAKKAR- BOILEAUGANJ
         BYPASS ROAD, SHIMLA-1711005 HP
         THROUGH ITS PROJECT DIRECTOR.


                                               .....RESPONDENTS

      (SH. SHRIYEK SHARDA, SENIOR ASSISTANT
      ADVOCATE GENERAL WITH SH. SUNNY



      DHATWALIA, ASSISTANT ADVOCATE GENERAL
      FOR R-1 TO R-3,
      SH. K.D. SHREEDHAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH




      SH. SAURABH AHLUWALIA, ADVOCATE FOR R-4)
______________________________________________________





                This petition coming on for hearing this day, the





    Court passed the following:

                              ORDER

The petitioners seek a direction to the respondents

to initiate land acquisition process in respect of their property

comprised in Khata Khatauni No. 32/36, Khasra No.

130/176/33, measuring 2 bigha, situated in mauza Bara, Tehsil

and District Solan. The relief has been claimed on the ground

that this land has been utilized by the respondents while four

laning National Highway No. 5 from Parwanoo to Shimla. In

.

support of this contention, it has been submitted that a

demarcation was carried out at the instance of the petitioners by

the concerned revenue agency on 4.7.2018. As per the

demarcation report, the road has been found to be constructed

2. to over the land belonging to the petitioners.

Respondent No. 4 in its reply filed to the writ petition

has taken a stand that the demarcation conducted at the site on

4.7.2018 being relied upon by the petitioners, was carried out

without associating the said respondent and in violation of

principles of natural justice. The demarcation report and the

order dated 23.10.2018 passed by Assistant Collector First

Grade, Solan on the basis of this demarcation report has been

challenged by the respondent in appeal under Section 14 of the

H.P. Land Revenue Act 1954 in the Court of Collector-cum-

SOD, Solan. The appeal is pending adjudication. The argument

thus raised is that the demarcation report has not attained

finality and therefore, cannot be acted upon.

3. In similar factual situation, a Division Bench of this

Court in CWP No. 5558 of 2020, titled Kewal Singh & ors.

versus Union of India & others, decided on 24.8.2021 has held

that "until and unless the authority takes a decision, a writ

.

cannot be issued on the basis of the disputed document.

Hence, we do not find any good ground to interfere in the same

and the instant petition is dismissed. However, liberty is

granted to the petitioners to take appropriate remedy as

available to them in accordance with law." The facts of the

instant case, as noticed above, are squarely covered by the

ratio of judgment rendered in Kewal Singh's case supra.

Accordingly, instant petition is held to be not

maintainable at this stage. However, considering the fact that

the demarcation report challenged by the respondent is dated

04.07.2018, there shall be a direction to respondent No. 3 to

decide the pending appeal filed by respondent No. 4 against the

demarcation report dated 4.7.2018 and the order dated

23.10.2018 within a period of six weeks from today. The

petition is disposed of alongwith the pending application(s), if

any.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 27th October, 2021 (vs)