Arun Sharma And Others vs State Of Himachal Pradesh Through Its Chief Secretary And Others

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

The petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to initiate land acquisition process in respect of their property comprised in Khata Khatauni No. 32/36, Khasra No. 130/176/33, measuring 2 bigha, situated in mauza Bara, Tehsil and District Solan. The relief has been claimed on the ground that this land has been utilized by the respondents while four laning National Highway No. 5 from Parwanoo to Shimla. In support of this contention, it has been submitted that a demarcation was carried out at the instance of the petitioners by the concerned revenue agency on 4.7.2018. As per the demarcation report, the road has been found to be constructed over the land belonging to the petitioners.

Respondent No. 4 in its reply filed to the writ petition has taken a stand that the demarcation conducted at the site on 4.7.2018 being relied upon by the petitioners, was carried out without associating the said respondent and in violation of principles of natural justice. The demarcation report and the order dated 23.10.2018 passed by Assistant Collector First Grade, Solan on the basis of this demarcation report has been challenged by the respondent in appeal under Section 14 of the H.P. Land Revenue Act 1954 in the Court of Collector-cum-SOD, Solan. The appeal is pending adjudication. The argument thus raised is that the demarcation report has not attained finality and therefore, cannot be acted upon.

In similar factual situation, a Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 5558 of 2020, titled Kewal Singh & ors. versus Union of India & others, decided on 24.8.2021 has held that "until and unless the authority takes a decision, a writ cannot be issued on the basis of the disputed document. Hence, we do not find any good ground to interfere in the same and the instant petition is dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioners to take appropriate remedy as available to them in accordance with law." The facts of the instant case, as noticed above, are squarely covered by the ratio of judgment rendered in Kewal Singh's case supra.

Accordingly, instant petition is held to be not maintainable at this stage. However, considering the fact that the demarcation report challenged by the respondent is dated 04.07.2018, there shall be a direction to respondent No. 3 to decide the pending appeal filed by respondent No. 4 against the demarcation report dated 4.7.2018 and the order dated 23.10.2018 within a period of six weeks from today. The petition is disposed of alongwith the pending application(s), if any.