Sanjeev Kumar vs Collector Land Acquisition
2023 Latest Caselaw 9239 HP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Arb. Case No.487 of 2023 Date of Decision: 12.07.2023

.

_______________________________________________________

Sanjeev Kumar ....Petitioner

Versus

Collector Land Acquisition, National Highways Authority of India &ors.

... Respondents ________________________________________________________

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Maan Singh, Advocate.

For the Respondents:

r Mr. K.D.Shreedhar, Senior Advocate

with Ms. Shreya Chauhan and Ms. Sneh Bhimta, Advocates, for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar

and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Rahul Thakur, and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate Generals, for respondent

No.3-State.

_______________________________________________________

Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):

By way of instant petition, a prayer has been made to

extend the time for completion of arbitration proceedings pending

before learned Divisional Commissioner, Mandi, in Reference Petition

No.1185 of 2017.

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

2. It is submitted in the application that though the

proceedings were started by learned Divisional Commissioner, Mandi,

in the year 2017 and the evidence etc., was recorded but due to

.

COVID pandemic conditions, the delay in further proceedings of the

case was caused. As a result of aforesaid exigency, the docket of

learned Divisional Commissioner, Mandi, is clogged with similar

matters which are pending before such authority. On such grounds

extension of time is sought.

3. The respondents, though, have filed reply in the court

today itself, but there is no opposition to the prayer made in the

application. The application is duly supported by an affidavit. The

record of the proceedings held by Divisional Commissioner, Mandi,

has also been placed on record. From perusal of the reasons stated in

the application as also the record of the learned Divisional

Commissioner, Mandi, I am satisfied that the delay in completion of

proceedings is neither intentional nor willful, but is on account of

reasons which were beyond the control of the learned Arbitrator as

also the parties concerned.

4. Otherwise, parties are ad-idem that the issue at hand has

been adjudicated by this Court in Arb. Case No. 44 of 2023, titled

Nand Lal alias Nand Lal Vardhan v. Land Acquisition Collector

and others, wherein provisions of S.29A of the Act have been

discussed in detail.

5. In view of this, the application is allowed. The time for

.

completion of arbitration proceedings by learned Divisional

Commissioner, Mandi, in Reference Petition No.1185 of 2017 is

extended by six months to be reckoned from the date parties appear

before learned Arbitrator. Parties are directed to appear before learned

Arbitrator on 17.7.2023. The petition is accordingly disposed of.

A downloaded copy of this order shall suffice for the

learned arbitrator to do the needful in terms thereof.

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge July 12, 2023 (shankar)