IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 3923 of 2023 a/w CWP No.3922 of 2023 Decided on 01st July 2025 CWP No.3923 of 2023 Sh. Mangat Ram …Petitioner Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents _________________________________________________ CWP No.3922 of 2023 Sh. Tara Chand Katoch …Petitioner Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner(s): Mr. Khube Ram Thakur, Advocate, for the petitioner(s), in both the petitions. For the respondents: Mr. Sumit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) CMP Nos. 2527 and 2528 of 2025 For the reason stated therein, present applications seeking early hearing of the petitions are allowed and disposed of. 2 2. As common issues of law and facts are involved in these petitions, therefore, the same are being disposed of vide common judgment. 3. By way of these writ petitions, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:- CWP No.3923 of 2023 i. “That the writ in the nature of Certiorari, Mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper directing the respondents to take immediate time bond steps for acquisition of land of the petitioner measuring 18 Biswas in Khasra No. 3118 utilize by the respondents for construction of Ranabag to Lagauti road and assess the damages caused on account of uprooting of fruit and non-fruit trees and for damages cause to the adjoining land of the petitioner injuriously effected while taking possession of the land of the petitioner for the construction of the road. Respondents be also directed to take immediate steps for acquisition of his other land utilized by the respondents for construction of Khenvi to Bansha road, assess the damages of fruit and non-fruit trees uprooted from his land and damage caused to his other land injuriously effected while taking possession and utilizing land of the petitioner comprised in Khasra No. 2160, 2181 and 2182 situated at Mohal Bishladhar, Tehsil & District Kullu, HP and pay the compensation alongwith all statutory benefits. ii. Issue writ of Mandamus directed the respondents to produce entire record of the construction Ranbag to Lagauti and Khenvi to Bansha Road particularly the record of entire correspondences between petitioner and respondents. CWP No.3922 of 2023 i) That the writ in the nature of Certiorari, mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper directing the respondent to take immediate time bound steps for acquisition of the land of the petitioner comprised in Khata No.442 Min, Khatouni No.535 Min, Khasra No.2563 situated at Bishladhar, Tehsil Ani, District Kullu, which has been utilized by the respondents for 3 the construction of Ranabag to Lagauti road work started in the year 1996-97 and also for the land utilized for the construction of Khenvi to Bansha road work started in the year 1998-99 and pay the compensation alongwith all statutory benefits as provided under the amended act No. 30 of 2013, also to pay compensation to the petitioner for the loss suffered by him on account of uprooting of fruit and non- fruit trees during the construction of road and also damage caused to his adjoining land for injuriously effecting it at the time of taking possession of the land by the respondents for the construction of aforesaid roads. ii) Issue writ of mandamus directing the respondents to produce entire record of construction of Ranabag to Lagauti road and Khenvi to Bansha road particularly directing the respondents to produce entire record of correspondences exchange between the parties qua the claim of the petitioner for payment of compensation iii) The respondents be directed immediate steps for acquisition of the land utilized by the respondents for the construction of Ranabag to Lagauti road and Khenvi to Bansha Road and to assess the damages suffered by the petitioner on account of uprooting of fruit and non-fruit trees and for damage caused to his other adjoining land injuriously effected by the respondents at the time of construction of the aforesaid roads and pay the compensation alongwith all statutory benefits.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the grievance of the petitioners is that their land stands utilized for the construction of the road, details whereof are given in the writ petitions, but till date, the petitioners have not been compensated, though the petitioners never consented for the utilization of the land. 5. A perusal of the reply filed to the writ petition demonstrates that though there is no denial to the fact that the 4 land of the petitioners has been utilized for the purpose of the construction of the road in issue i.e. Ranabag to Lagauti road as well as Khenvi to Bansha, however, as per the respondents, the petitioners have approached this Court belatedly and further the land was voluntarily offered by the petitioners/predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the land of the petitioners was utilized by the respondents without their consent or the consent of predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners. He submits that there was no consent for handing over the land by the petitioners to the respondents to construct road as alleged and in these circumstances the State cannot be allowed to utilize the land of the petitioner without compensating the petitioner i.e. the land owner. 7. Taking into consideration the fact that there is no specific denial of the fact that the land of the petitioners has been utilized by the State and there is no material on record placed by the State to demonstrates that the same was either voluntarily given for the purpose of the construction of the road by the petitioners or their predecessor-in-interest, this Court is 5 of the considered view that the State cannot be allowed to utilize the land of the petitioners without compensating him. It is settled law that no one can be deprived of his property except in accordance with law. Right to property is a constitutional right in terms of Article 300(A) of the constitution of India. Hon’ble Supreme Court in more than one case has held that it is least expected from the State that it utilizes the land of private land owners without compensating them, may be for public purpose. 8. Therefore, in the light of the observation made hereinabove, these writ petitions are allowed, with the direction that let the land of the petitioners be acquired in accordance with law, however, for the purpose of conferment of benefit of acquisition upon the petitioners, date of acquisition shall be presumed to be the date on which the writ petitions were filed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge July 01, 2025 (Vinod)