2026:HHC:36618 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.633 of 2026 Decided on: 27th August, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prashant Gupta …..Petitioner Versus Devesh Kumar and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Deepak Kaushal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Amit Sharma and Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioner is with the grievance that the judgment rendered in Prashant Gupta Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.2 has still not been implemented, wherein, following operative directions were issued:- “14. Consequently, in view of the detailed discussion made herein above as well as law taken into consideration, this Court finds merit in the present petition and accordingly same is allowed with a direction to the respondents to initiate acquisition 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes 2 CWP No.9306 of 2023, decided on 23.04.2024 2 2026:HHC:36618 proceedings within four weeks under the relevant statute vis­à­vis land of the petitioner and thereafter, just and fair compensation qua the same be awarded to the petitioner. Since petitioner has been fighting for his rightful claim for more than four decades, this Court hopes and trusts that authority concerned would do the needful expeditiously, preferably, within two months. In the aforesaid terms, present petition is disposed of alongwith pending applications, if any.” 2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the above directions have not been implemented and the instant is the third contempt petition instituted by the petitioner. The previous one instituted by the petitioner, being COPC No.728 of 2024, was decided on 21.05.2025 with direction to the respondents to ensure issuance of notification under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act (in short ‘the Act’) within two weeks. Failure was to be viewed seriously and was to amount to aggravation of the contempt. Petitioner instituted CMP No.20500 of 2025 in the afore-mentioned contempt petition, seeking its revival. The application was disposed of on 10.09.2025 taking note of the fact that the respondents had decided to issue notification under Section 11 of the Act. The respondents were directed to ensure issuance of notification under Section 11 of the Act expeditiously and preferably within four weeks. Neither the decision rendered in the main writ petition nor the assurance recorded in the 3 2026:HHC:36618 contempt petition and subsequently in the application moved in the disposed of contempt petition were honoured by the respondents. Petitioner instituted COPC No.1465 of 2025, which was disposed of on 23.12.2025 taking note of the draft notification under Section 11 of the Act submitted by the concerned officials to the State Government. The notification under Section 11 of the Act was issued by the respondents on 07.01.2026 pertaining to 09-06-00 bighas of land owned by the petitioner comprised in Khasra No.485/341/282. Taking note of the said notification, the contempt proceedings were finally closed on 08.01.2026 with direction to the respondents to ensure completion of the acquisition proceedings within the stipulated period. 3. Petitioner instituted the present contempt proceedings with the grievance that nothing further thereafter was moved at the end of the respondents. No constructive steps were taken by the respondents for completing the land acquisition process. Following order was passed in the matter on 25.06.2026:- “Learned Assistant Advocate General has placed on record office letter dated 24.06.2026 from Executive Engineer, Nahan Division, H.P.P.W.D, Nahan conveying that notification under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act stands issued on 07.01.2026; That 4 2026:HHC:36618 matter of issuance of notification under Section 19 has been processed vide letter dated 11.06.2026. Let notification issued under Section 19 be placed in the case file by the next date. List after two weeks.” The respondents though have now issued notification under Section 19 of the Act, however, the petitioner had certain grievances in respect of the area said to be acquired under the aforesaid notification. Petitioner’s grievances were noticed as under in the order passed on 07.08.2026:- “Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record copy of office instructions dated 04.08.2026 from the Executive Engineer, HPPWD Division Nahan alongwith notification dated 01.08.2026 issued under Section 19 of the Act of 2013. Under the aforesaid notification, the subject area has been mentioned as measuring 02­12­00 bighas, comprised in Khasra No.485/341/282/1, Kita 1, Village Nagal Saketi, Tehsil Nahan, District Sirmour. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner raises a grievance that the area acquired reflected in the notification dated 01.08.2026 is less than the area notified on 07.01.2026 for acquisition under Section 11 of the Act. The notification dated 07.01.2026 was placed on record by the respondents themselves alongwith office instructions dated 24.06.2026 during hearing of this contempt petition on 25.06.2026. Office instructions dated 24.06.2026 were in furtherance of the directions issued in the judgment dated 23.04.2024 passed in CWP No.9306 of 2023 (Prashant Gupta Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.), wherein, petitioner’s prayer was for paying just and fair compensation in accordance with law for utilization of his land comprised in Khasra No.485/341/282, measuring 09­06­00 bighas. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner raises another grievance that the notification dated 01.08.2026 is even otherwise not in 5 2026:HHC:36618 consonance with Section 19 of the Act, as provisos to Section 19(2) have not been complied with. In view of above, let the respondents attend the hearing of the case on the next date. List on 27.08.2026.” Pursuant to the aforesaid order, today’s hearing has been attended by Mr. Tribhuwan Sharma, Land Acquisition Officer, South Zone, HPPWD Winterfield, Shimla and Mr. Alok Janreja, Executive Engineer, HPPWD Division Nahan, District Sirmour. The respondents have also produced the record. In terms of the record, demarcation of the land in question was conducted on 04.08.2025 in presence of the petitioner. In terms of the demarcation report, the PWD road was traversing through 02-12 bighas of petitioner’s land comprised in Khasra No.485/341/282/1, Village Nagal Saketi, Tehsil Nahan, District Sirmour and the remaining land comprised in Khasra No.485/341/282 was in the ownership & possession of the petitioner. According to the respondents, for this reason, notification under Section 19 of the Act was issued only qua area measuring 02-12 bighas of the aforesaid khasra number. 4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner raises a grievance that even if according to the respondents, the 6 2026:HHC:36618 road is traversing through 02-12 bighas of petitioner’s land comprised in Khasra No.485/341/282/1, yet the respondents are not doing the needful in terms of the judgment and various assurances & directions issued in several rounds of litigation initiated by him for getting the judgment implemented. That it has been more than two years, but the judgment rendered on 23.04.2024 has still not been implemented. Learned Advocate General on the basis of instructions imparted by Mr. Tribhuwan Sharma, Land Acquisition Officer, South Zone, HPPWD Winterfield, Shimla, now submits that only award is required to be passed qua 02-12 bighas of petitioner’s land comprised in Khasra No.485/341/282/1 and the same shall be positively announced within a period of three months from today, i.e. by or before 26.11.2026. The Officer present has assured of passing the award within the timeline indicated by the learned Advocate General. 5. In view of above, these contempt proceedings are closed with direction to the respondents to abide by the assurance given above and to complete the acquisition proceedings by announcing the award by or before 26.11.2026, failing which, the Officer responsible for 7 2026:HHC:36618 passing the award shall be held personally accountable. Notices issued to the respondents are discharged. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua August 27, 2026 Judge Mukesh