PAWAN CHAND Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having regard to the innocuous prayer made by the learned counsel representing the petitioners as well as in view of the order proposed to be passed, this Court finds that there is no necessity to call for any reply, even otherwise, respondents No.1 to 4 are being represented by Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General.

(2.) By way of instant petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioners to issue direction to respondents No.1 to 3 to decide the application for releasing of compensation amount, having been filed by the petitioners qua their respective shares. Though, application for release was filed in the year 2021, but till date, the same has not been decided by the SDO, Civil-cum-Land Acquisition Collector, Amb, District Una, and as such, petitioners are compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings.

(3.) Learned Additional Advocate General is not opposed the aforesaid innocuous prayer made by the learned counsel representing the petitioners.