Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 37962 (HP)

HIRA NAND AND OTHERS v. STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

EX.P./399/2025 · 2025-12-19

Sandeep Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No. 399 of 2025 Date of Decision: 19.12.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Hira Nand and Ors. ……...Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: Mr. Tek Chand Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) While placing on record communication dated 18.12.2025, issued under the signature of Superintending Engineer 4th Circle HPPWD, Shimla, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, states that in terms of mandate contained in the judgment alleged to have been violated, necessary steps for issuing notification under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act have been initiated by issuing necessary direction to LAC (SZ) HPPWD vide letter dated 17.12.2025. He submitted that draft 2 notification will be submitted to the Government for issuance at the earliest and further proceedings will be carried out in accordance with law. 2. Having carefully perused aforesaid communication, which is taken on record, there appears to be merit in the contention of learned Additional Advocate General. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant proceedings and as such, present petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to ensure that notice under Section 11 of the Act, if not already issued, shall be issued expeditiously, preferably, within four weeks and thereafter acquisition proceedings shall be taken to logical end within statutory period, failing which petitioner would be at liberty to get the present petition revived so that appropriate action is taken towards implementation and execution of the judgment sought to be executed. December 19, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge