LAWS(HPH)-2013-4-138

JIT RAM Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

Decided On April 29, 2013
JIT RAM Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE common questions of law and facts are involved in all the writ petitions, these were taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of by this common judgment. However, in order to maintain clarity, the facts of C.W.P. No. 3571 of 2009 -G have been taken into consideration.

(2.) MR . J.S. Bhogal, learned Senior Advocate has vehemently argued that since the possession of Khasra No. 161 has been taken over, the State Government is bound to acquire the land of the petitioners and to pay them adequate compensation. He further contended that once the notification has been issued under Section 17(4) of the Act, the same could not be withdrawn by the State Government after taking possession under Section 48 of the Act.

(3.) MR . K.D. Shreedhar, learned Senior Advocate, for respondents No. 3 and 4, has strenuously argued that the possession of Khasra No. 161 was never taken over and it is always open to the State Government to withdraw the notification issued under Section 17(4) of the Act on 16.11.2005.