KHURI Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for following main relief(s):

(2.) Briefly stated the facts as emerge from record are that land belonging to the petitioner, description whereof is available in para-4 of the petition, has been used by the respondents for the construction of road namely Mandhol-Khara Pathar-Patsai road in the year 1993 and it was completed in 2007. Petitioner has specifically averred in the petition that for the construction of aforesaid road, land of the petitioner has been used by the respondents without there being any acquisition of land. Pleadings further suggest that the petitioner, at the time of construction of road, raised objection and prayed that before starting construction of road, steps may be initiated for acquiring the land in accordance with Land Acquisition Act (in short, 'Act'). It also emerges from the record that on the assurance having been given by the respondent Department, petitioner allowed department concerned to construct the road through the land without there being acquisition of the land in terms of the Act. Pleadings further suggest that petitioner was assured by the representatives of the Department that acquisition proceedings would be started and amount of compensation would be paid in accordance with law. In the aforesaid background, petitioner allowed road to be constructed through the land as described in the petition but after the construction of the road, where now vehicles ply, no steps, whatsoever, were taken by the respondents for acquiring the land, admittedly, having been used by them for the construction of aforesaid road. It also emerges from the record that the petitioner made several requests to the authorities for initiating process for acquisition of land and payment of compensation thereafter, but despite that, no action was taken and as such petitioner was compelled to file present petition, for the redressal of her grievances praying therein for reliefs as reproduced herein above.

(3.) Respondents, pursuant to issuance of notice by this Court, filed a detailed reply refuting therein the claim of petitioner. Respondents, in their reply, submitted that the rural link road namely Mandhol-Khara Pathar-Patsai from KM 0/0 to 10/0 was proposed to be constructed under State Head during 1985 to facilitate the public of the area upon their popular demand to take their horticulture produce to the market by providing road connectivity. Work of the construction of road was started in 1985 from Magawta side and completed upto KM 4/810 upto village Madot in the year 1990-91. Land of the petitioner falls between RD 4/500 to 4/810 and cutting work through this portion of land as per MB (Measurement Book) entries (JD No. 1318 Page 4 to 7) has been completed during 1990-91. Respondents also placed on record copies of MB's suggestive of the fact that land in question was actually used by the respondent Department for the construction of road. It also emerges from annexure R-1 that at the relevant time, entries were made by the concerned officer in the MB. However, respondents categorically denied the contentions having been put forth on behalf of the petitioner that he had objected to the construction of road through his land, rather, respondents have stated that the road in question was constructed on the 'persistent demand' of people of area. It would be apt to reproduced herein following para of the reply filed by the respondents: