1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA LPA No.125 of 2026 Date of Decision : 25.03.2026 Munish Sharma and others …… Appellants Versus Vinod Sharma and Others …… Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellants : Mr. Bhupinder Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Janesh Gupta, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Varun Chandel, Additional Advocate General. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral) The present Letters Patent Appeal is filed by the present appellants (respondents No.7 to 9 in the writ petition), who are aggrieved by the judgment dated 11.08.2025 of learned Single Judge, passed in CWP No.8431 of 2025, titled Vinod Sharma vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, whereby, the learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition filed by the respondent, herein, by directing that the structure mentioned in the petition, qua which complete compensation has been paid to the erstwhile owners, be demolished forthwith and any hindrance in the demolition of the said structure shall amount to contempt of the orders passed by the Court. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. The original writ petition was filed by Vinod Sharma, respondent herein, seeking demolition & complete removal of the half- dismantled/dilapidated structures in Village Balh P.O. Kohala, Tehsil Jawalamukhi, District Kangra and restoration of the entire acquired land/building to a safe, debris-free, hazard-fee and leveled condition and further restrain respondents No.7 to 9, the present appellants from undertaking any kind of re-construction, repair, re-erection and alteration on the structures or any other portion of the acquired land, for which compensation, has been paid. 3. Apparently, in the reply so filed to the petition (CWP No.8431 of 2025) by respondents No.2, 3 and 5 (National Highway Authority of India), the stand taken was that the land of the present appellants has been acquired with or without structures and as per award No.77 dated 16.03.2023, a total amount of Rs.5,90,85,136/- was approved by the competent authority. The relevant portion of the said reply reads as under: “That the land of respondent no. 7.8 &9 has been acquired with or without structures vide notification u/s 3D of 'The National Highway Act 1956' dated 17.05.2022 & 26.10.2022. As per section 3D (2) of the Act, 'On publication of the declaration under sub section (1), the land shall vest absolutely in the Central Government free from all encumbrances'. The Compensation for the structure no. 83 and 94 along with other acquired structures were determined by CALA (respondent no. 6) vide award no. 77 dated 16-03-2023 and a total amount of Rs. 5, 90,85,136/- was approved by the Competent Authority of 3 NHAI vide office letter dated 24-03-2023 (Annexure R-3/2). Therefore, these two structures have been acquired vide notifications dated 17.05.2022 and 26.10.2022 u/s 3D of the NH Act and compensation determined vide award no. 77 dated 16-03-2023.” 4. Thus, in view of the above reply, once the present appellants are the beneficiaries of the award and on account of the said land having been acquired along-with the structures standing on the said land, we are of the considered view that the directions issued by the learned Single Judge do not suffer from any infirmity which would warrant interference in the present appeal. 5. Further, the appellants cannot not have the advantage of the receipt of compensation and also to continue the possession on the land which now is in the ownership of the National Highway Authority of India for the purpose of infrastructural/building capacity. The specific averment made in the writ petition, in Paragraph-14 is that the compensation awarded to respondents No.7 to 9 for the two buildings, i.e., CC No.83 & 94, was Rs.62,12,284/- and Rs.29,01,762/- respectively. 6. The said fact has also been admitted by the present appellants, in their reply to Paragraph-14, wherein, it had been mentioned that the contents of Paragraph-14 do not call for any reply. In such circumstances, it is apparent that apart from the costs of the construction of the buildings, an additional amount has also been awarded for the price of the land. 7. It is also pertinent to notice that since the award was passed in the year, 2023, the present appellants did not agitate, in any manner, in 4 any Court that they were being divested of their property without compensation. In such circumstances, they cannot stand here and submit that they have been divested from part of their property without any compensation. The directions of the learned Single Judge are exclusive and clear that only what has been acquired by the National Highway Authority of India, only that portion has to be demolished and possession taken. In such circumstances, we do not find any ground to further go into the issue and interfere in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge. 8. In view of above, present appeal is dismissed. The pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ( G.S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice ( Bipin Chander Negi) March 25, 2026 (KS) Judge