2025:HHC:25474 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 7277 of 2024 Reserved on: 21.07.2025 Decided on: 31.07.2025 Surya Narayan Bandh Visthapit Sangharsh Samiti, Neerath … Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes _____________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. Hamender Singh Chandel, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Rajpal Thakur, Additional Advocate General for respondents No. 1 to 3 and 6 to 8. : Ms. Shradha Karol, Advocate for respondents No. 4, 5 and 9. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for the following reliefs:- “i. That the entire exercise of constitution and reconstitution of negotiating committee for purchase of private land of the petitioners and consequential execution of sale deeds may be declared as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India. ii. That the Respondents may be directed to acquire the land 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:25474 of the members of the petitioner Society qua which the sale deeds were illegally executed, as per the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency of Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 with all consequential benefits.” 2. The petitioner claims itself to be a Society registered under the Societies Act, 1860. The petitioner-Society has approached this Court with the prayer that the exercise of constitution and re-constitution of negotiating committee for purchase of private lands of the members of the petitioner and consequential execution of the sale deeds, may be declared as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and the respondents be directed to acquire the land of the members of the petitioner-Society qua which, sale deeds were illegally executed. 3. It is averred in the writ petition that respondent No. 4, which is a public listed company, intended to establish a Hydro Electricity Power Projects in Sutlej basin. As per the petitioner, in terms of Annexure P-17, notification dated 20.04.2019, in supersession of previous notifications, the Governor of Himachal Pradesh was pleased to constitute a Negotiation Committee under the Chairmanship of Sub-Divisional Magistrate (Civil), Rampur, District Shimla, to expedite land acquisition process in respect of residents of villages Badrash, Nirath and Narola under Rampur Sub 3 2025:HHC:25474 division for the construction of Luhri HEP, Stage-I (219 MW) on River Satluj, in District Shimla, H.P. Thereafter, the officers of respondent No. 4 allured about 500 land owners of the area i.e. land owners of village Nirath and village Badrash with false promises and enticed them to enter into sale agreements for the sale of their land for the purpose of construction of the said Hydro Power Project. According to the petitioner, the sale deeds which have been so executed, have been executed in an arbitrary and unreasonable manner by the respondents, whose intent was not to pay to the land owners the correct value of their land and thus not to give them the benefit of the Fair Compensation and Transparency of Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. As per the petitioner, there is no policy of the Government of India or the Board of Directors of SJVNL or the State Government that the required land for Luhri HEP should be purchased by SJVNL by way of negotiation and this entire exercise has been done in a clandestine and surreptitious manner and there is possibility of collusion between the officials of the SJVNL and the State Government. Primarily it is in this backdrop that the petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer mentioned herein above that it was on account of allurement and threats given by the officials of the SJVNL that the members of the Negotiating Committee compelled the members of the society to sell their land even below the Circle 4 2025:HHC:25474 Rates. 4. This Court questioned learned Counsel for the petitioner qua the maintainability of this writ petition on the ground that as what was the locus of the Society to seek quashing of the sale deeds duly entered into between respondent No. 4 and the land owners, who incidentally were not before the Court but were mentioned to be the members of the Society. Now incidentally, this petition has been filed on the affidavit of one Babu Ram and on a pointed query to learned Counsel for the petitioner, as to whether Sh. Babu Ram was one of the 500 land owners, whose land was purchased by way of sale deeds by respondent No. 4 or not, the answer was that he was not one of the persons whose land was purchased by respondent No. 5. In this backdrop, this Court is of the considered that this writ petition is not maintainable. The petitioner-Society has no locus to file and maintain this writ petition. There are duly executed sale deeds between the land owners and respondent No. 4, which were registered in accordance with law. Now, if someone is aggrieved by the fact that the said sale deeds were obtained by fraud played by respondent No. 4, then such land owner can go to the appropriate Court, seeking a declaration to this effect. However, by no stretch of imagination, petitioner-Society has any locus to make bald allegation of arbitrariness, threats, allurements etc. and that too, on the basis of an affidavit sworn in by an individual, who is not even one of 5 2025:HHC:25474 those 500 land owners, who allegedly were forced to enter into the sale deeds. Therefore, this Court has no hesitation in holding that filing of this writ petition is nothing but abuse of process of law. Even otherwise, these issues as to whether the execution of the sale deeds were a result of coercion or were voluntarily executed by the land owners and respondent No. 4 are highly disputed questions of fact which cannot be gone into by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, as filing of this writ petition by the petitioner-Society is nothing but abuse of the process of law, as it has no locus to file and maintain this writ petition, the same is dismissed with cost assessed at Rs. 1.00 Lac which shall be deposited by the petitioner in Advocates Welfare Fund with Himachal Pradesh High Court Bar Association. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge July 31, 2025 (narender)