Himachal Pradesh HC Directs Compensation For Landowners Whose Land Was Used Without Consent For Construction Of Gohar-Kandha Road Under Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has directed the State to compensate the landowners whose land was used without their consent to construct the Gohar-Kandha Road under the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana.
The Court ordered the State to initiate acquisition proceedings and award compensation to Petitioners whose land was utilised for constructing the Gohar-Kandha Road (the Road) under the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY) without their consent noting the same as violation of property rights guaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution.
A Single Bench of Justice Sandeep Sharma held, “Consequently, in view of the detailed discussion made hereinabove as well as law taken into consideration, this Court finds merit in the present petition and accordingly, the same is allowed with direction to the respondents to initiate acquisition proceedings within four weeks under the relevant statute vis-à-vis land of the petitioners and thereafter, just and fair compensation qua the same be awarded to the petitioners. Since petitioners have been fighting for their rightful claim for so long, this Court hopes and trusts that authority concerned would do the needful expeditiously, preferably, within four months.”
Advocate Dikken Kumar Thakur appeared for the Petitioners, while Additional Advocate General Rajan Kahol represented the Respondents.
The Petitioners submitted that their land, located in the District Mandi, was used for road construction decades ago without acquiring their consent or compensating them. Despite repeated requests since 2018, they argued that the authorities had yet to initiate acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act.
The Respondents argued that the construction of the road began between 1990 and 1992, with widening completed by 2006. They claimed the petitioners had impliedly consented to the use of their land, pointing to their silence over three decades.
The High Court rejected the State’s argument that the land was donated or gifted by the Petitioners by free will for the construction of the road under PMGSY.
The Bench referred to the decision in Vidya Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2020), wherein it was held, “To forcibly dispossess a person of his private property, without following due process of law, would be violative of a human right, as also the constitutional right under Article 300 A of the Constitution.”
In the case of Vidya Dev (supra), the Apex Court also clarified, “Delay and laches cannot be raised in a case of a continuing cause of action, or if the circumstances shock the judicial conscience of the Court. Condonation of delay is a matter of judicial discretion, which must be exercised judiciously and reasonably in the facts and circumstances of a case. It will depend upon the breach of fundamental rights, and the remedy claimed, and when and how the delay arose. There is no period of limitation prescribed for the courts to exercise their constitutional jurisdiction to do substantial justice.”
Similarly, in the Full Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court in State of Himachal Pradesh v. Sita Ram had held that “a person, whose land has been utilized for construction of road under PMGSY, is entitled for compensation, unless it is proved to the satisfaction of the court, that land was donated or given by the land owner willingly, of his own free will and consent, for construction of such road.”
Consequently, the Court directed the Respondents to initiate acquisition proceedings.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Petition.
Cause Title: Muni Lal & Ors. v. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:HHC:13215)
Appearance:
Petitioners: Advocate Dikken Kumar Thakur
Respondents: Additional Advocates General Rajan Kahol, Vishal Panwar and B.C. Verma; Deputy Advocate Genera Ravi Chauhan; CGC Vir Bahadur Verma
