2025:HHC:21484 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 10652 of 2025 Decided on: 07.07.2025 Lalish Kumar … Petitioner Versus Union of India and others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 _____________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. C.D. Negi, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Nand Lal Thakur, Senior Panel Counsel, for respondents No. 1 to 3- UOI. Mr. Pushpender Jaswal, Addl. AG for respondents No. 4 and 5-State. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has primarily prayed for the following reliefs:- “i. That an appropriate writ, order or direction may kindly be issued and the respondent No.5 may kindly be directed to forward the reference petition filed by the petitioner to the court of Ld. District and Sessions Judge Kinnaur, District Kinnaur for its proper adjudication and the petitioner may kindly be granted awarded amount as per provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 in the 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:21484 interest of justice.; (ii) That an appropriate writ, order or direction may kindly be issued thereby quashing and setting aside the corrigendum dated 22.11.2024 (Annexure P-5) issued by eh respondent No.5.” 3. When this case was taken up for consideration, the Court stands informed that the notification issued by the State of Himachal Pradesh dated 01.04.2015, on the basis of which corrigendum impugned by way of this petition dated 22.11.2024 (Annexure P-5) was issued by the Additional District Magistrate, Pooh Sub Division Pooh, District Kinnaur, H.P., has been held to be bad in law by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 149 of 2025, titled as Keshav Ram and others vs. State of H.P. and others and connected matter, decided on 22.05.2025. Learned Counsel for the respondents do not dispute this fact. Taking into consideration the fact that the impugned corrigendum was issued by the Authority in exercise of powers conferred upon it under Section 33 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, by placing reliance upon a notification of the Government, which notification has been set aside by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, the corrigendum in issue, obviously, has lost its force and cannot be 3 2025:HHC:21484 said to be a legally issued corrigendum. Accordingly, said corrigendum is quashed and set aside. Consequences to ensue. The writ petition stands disposed of in above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge July 07, 2025 (narender)