Himachal Pradesh High Court
Deepak Gupta vs . Aditya Negi & Others. on 29 July, 2022
Author: Tarlok Singh Chauhan
Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan
Deepak Gupta vs. Aditya Negi & others.
COPC No. 111 of 2019.
.
29.07.2022. Present: Mr. Jagdish Thakur, Advocate, as Amicus Curiae.
Ms. Meera Devi, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General with Mr. Vinod Thakur, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Law Officer, for the respondent- State.
Mr. K.D.Shreedhar, Senior Advocate with Ms.Sneh Bhimta, Advocate, for respondent No.16-NHAI.
Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No.4 and 5.
Mr. Maan Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.7.
Mr. Naresh K. Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No.9.
Mr. J.S. Bhogal, Senior Advocate with Mr. T.S. Bhogal, Advocate, for respondents No.13 and 14.
Mr. Satish Sharma, Advocate, for applicants in application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC.
On 22.07.2022, this Court passed the following order:-
"Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record letter dated 20.07.2022, which this Court is not in a position to appreciate much less understand as to what has been set out in the last para of the letter, which reads as under:-
"In this regard DC Shimla has been requested to direct the concerned SDM to find suitable land for alternate alignments."
Learned Additional Advocate General agrees that the aforesaid para is not at all clear and he prays for and is granted one week's time to obtain instructions. List on 29.07.2022."
Today, learned Advocate General has placed on record the instructions dated 27.07.2022 received from the ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2022 20:04:18 :::CIS -2- .
Regional Transport Officer, Shimla, H.P. explaining the aforesaid position and the same reads as under:-
"In this context it is intimated that in response to the FCA clearance case that was submitted to the DFO Shimla on date 30-06-2022, the DFO Shimla has raised certain objections (copy enclosed). The objections raised at point No.2 of the said letter is that "The alternate alignment has not been shown/found in the proposal folder as well as KML file".
The alternate alignments as conveyed to this office by the DFO Shimla implies that an alternate site may be identified in addition to the site already identify earlier for Transport Nagar. Therefore, in the light of the above objections was raised by the DFO Shimla, the Deputy Commissioner Shimla vide letter No.RTA/SML/Transport Nagar/2021-4503 on dated 20-07-2022 has been requested to identify the alternate land for the construction of Transport Nagar."
This Court is not in a position to appreciate as to why despite best efforts and endeavours, the respondents are now looking for an alternate land for the construction of the Transport Nagar. This assumes an importance in light of the undertakings given by the respondents to this Court from time to time clearly stating therein that the site for the Transport Nagar has already been identified and infact work/progress on the site including obtaining requisite permission under the Forest Conservation Act has been resorted to.
In these circumstances, there is no question of respondents identifying an alternate land as site for the construction of Transport Nagar.
::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2022 20:04:18 :::CIS.
-2-The respondents are directed to proceed and process the case at the identified site and report compliance on the next date of hearing.
On the oral request of learned Advocate General, Union of India, through its Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, is ordered to be impleaded as party respondent.
Notice. Mr. Balram Sharma, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the newly added respondent. He prays for and is granted four weeks' time to obtain instructions.
List on 09.09.2022.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge July 29, 2022.
(krt) ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2022 20:04:18 :::CIS