2025:HHC:19412 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.7874 of 2024 Decided on: 23.06.2025 Sucha Singh … Petitioner Versus Union of Inddia & others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________ _ For the petitioner : Mr. Sudhir Thakur, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Sumesh Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent No.1. Mr. K.D. Shreedhar, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Sneh Bhimta, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.3 and 4-State. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- “i). By issuing writ of mandamus directing the respondents to acquire the land of the petitioner used for the construction/widening/four lanning of Kalka Shimla National Highway referred in Annexure P-1 to the extent referred in demarcation report Annexure P-2 in accordance with law. ii) By issuing writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:19412 to pay compensation to the petitioners in accordance with the appropriate provisions of law.” 2. When this case was taken up on 15.05.2025, the following order was passed:- “By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- “i) By issuing writ of mandamus directing the respondents to acquire the land of the petitioner used for the construction/widening/ four lanning of Kalka-Shimla National Highway referred in Annexure P-1 to the extent referred in demarcation report Annexure P-2 in accordance with law. ii) By issuing writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioners in accordance with the appropriate provisions of law.” The case of the petitioner is that his land has been utilized for the purpose of construction of the National Highway without compensating the petitioner in accordance with law. The petitioner relies upon the Demarcation Report to substantiate his contention. On the other hand, respondents No.1 and 2 deny the claim of the petitioner, inter alia, on the ground that demarcation being relied upon by the petitioner was carried out at the back of the said 3 2025:HHC:19412 respondents without associating them. As it is not in dispute that respondents No.1 and 2 were not associated with the demarcation that was carried out on which the petitioner is relying, with the consent of the parties Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocate is appointed as the Court Commissioner, who will ensure that fresh demarcation of the area is carried out by Tehsildar concerned to ascertain as to whether the land of the petitioner has been used for the purpose of construction of the National Highway or not and if yes, then to what extent. The fee of the Local Commissioner is fixed as Rs.50,000/-, out of which Rs.25,000/- will be paid by the petitioner and Rs.25,000/- will be paid by respondent No.2. Same shall be inclusive of all expenses also. The Revenue Authorities shall assist learned Local Commissioner in executing the commission and full assistance shall be rendered to him by Tehsildar concerned, who shall personally carried out the demarcation. List on 23.06.2025. Report of learned Court Commissioner be submitted on or before the said date. Learned Court Commissioner be apprised of the order passed, by the Registry.” 3. Pursuant thereto, the Court Commissioner has filed his report, which is taken on record. A perusal of the report of the Court 4 2025:HHC:19412 Commissioner demonstrates that 5 biswas of land of the petitioner has been used by respondent No.2 for the construction of the National Highway. Though, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the National Highway Authority of India has submitted in the light of the said report, let the matter be referred to the Committee constituted by the State vide Notification dated 08.06.2021, to assess the compensation to which the petitioner is entitled to vis-a-vis 5 biswas of land, however, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that because the constitution of the said Committee is for a limited purpose, that is to assess the damages caused to the land etc. of someone beyond ROW, therefore, it would be in the interest of justice in case the respondents are directed to acquire the same in accordance with law. 4. In the light of the fact that the land of the petitioner as per the report of the Court Commissioner is found to have been utilized for the purpose of construction of the National Highway, this petition is disposed of with the direction that let the same be acquired in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge 5 2025:HHC:19412 June 23, 2025 (Rishi)