Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Landowners Entitled to Compensation for Road Construction, Rules Himachal Pradesh High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Shimla, August 19, 2023  - In a significant judgment, the Himachal Pradesh High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, has ruled that landowners whose land has been utilized for road construction are entitled to compensation. The court’s decision came in response to a civil writ petition filed by Ram Dhan and another petitioner against the State of Himachal Pradesh.

The petitioners had approached the court seeking compensation for their land, which was used for the construction of the Jarol-Khai Ghat road via Behna. Despite the utilization of their land, the petitioners were not compensated, leading them to approach the court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

In the judgment delivered on August 19, 2023, Justice Sandeep Sharma observed, “The State cannot dispossess a citizen of his property except in accordance with the procedure established by law.” The court categorically rejected the argument of delay and laches raised by the respondents, referring to the precedents set by judgments such as Vidya Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh and others (2020) 2 SCC 569 and Sukh Dutt Ratra v. State of Himachal Pradesh and others (2022) 7 SCC 508.

Justice Sharma emphasized the constitutional and human right to property under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and underscored the importance of access to roads in hilly areas. The court also referred to the State of Himachal Pradesh v. Rajiv and others (Civil Appeal No. 1278 of 2023), where the issue of compensation for land utilized for road construction was discussed.

The judgment directed the respondents to initiate acquisition proceedings and award just and fair compensation to the petitioners within a stipulated timeframe. The court expressed hope that the authorities would expedite the resolution of the matter to address the petitioner’s rightful claim.

This ruling by the Himachal Pradesh High Court serves as a significant precedent for landowners whose property is utilized for public infrastructure projects. It reinforces the principle that individuals cannot be deprived of their property without proper compensation, in accordance with the law.

Decided on: August 19, 2023

Ram Dhan And Another vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And

Latest Legal News