State Of H.P. & Others vs . Hem Raj Mehta & Others.
2022 Latest Caselaw 7711 HP

State of H.P. & others vs. Hem Raj Mehta & Others.

LPA No.155 of 2022

.

13.09.2022 Present: Mr. Adarsh K. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for the appellants.

CMP (M) No.1197 of 2022

Infructuous.

LPA No.155 of 2022 & CMP No.12463 of 2022

Issue notice to the respondents, returnable by three

weeks, on taking steps within three days.

2. The LPA impugns the order dated 23rd September,

2021, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in CWP

No.74 of 2019.

3. The case of the petitioners in CWP No.74 of 2019 was

that though the petitioners' land was utilized in the year 1996-

97, no compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was

paid. The contention of the respondents therein (appellants

herein) in the writ petition was that the writ petition was hit by

the vice of delay and laches.

4. The learned Single Judge in the impugned order has

relied upon the judgments of the Supreme Court in Tukaram

Kana Joshi and others vs. Maharashtra Industrial

Development Corporation and others, (2013)1 SCC 353 and

Vidya Devi vs. State of H.P. and others, (2020) 2 SCC 569. So

far as Vidya Devi's case is concerned, in paragraph 13, their

Lordships have observed that the Court has exercised its

extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution in

directing the State to pay the compensation, which seems to

have been overlooked by the learned Single Judge.

.

5. Learned Additional Advocate General has placed

reliance on the judgment of the three-Judge Bench of the

Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra vs. Digambar, (1995)

4 SCC 683. It is contended that in the said case, it has been

held by the three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court that

unless the facts and circumstances of the case clearly justify the

condonation of delay and laches, the writ petitioner would not

be entitled to any relief seeking compensation. It is contended

by learned Additional Advocate General that the aforesaid

judgment in Digambar's case has not been taken into

consideration by the Supreme Court in Tukaram Kana Joshi's

case.

6. Until the next date of hearing, the impugned order

dated 23rd September, 2021, is stayed.

7. Respondents may file reply in the application.

( A.A. Sayed ) Chief Justice

( Jyotsna Rewal Dua ) Judge September 13, 2022 (vt)