Himachal Pradesh High Court
Ranjan Singh And Another vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 25 March, 2019
Bench: Surya Kant, Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
CWP No. 2284 of 2018
Decided on: 25.3.2019
_____________________________________________________________
.
Ranjan Singh and another ....Petitioners
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and others ...Respondents
_____________________________________________________________
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge
Whether approved for reporting1?
_____________________________________________________________
For the petitioners Mr. Karan Singh Kanwar, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General
with M/s Ranjan Sharma, Adarsh
Sharma, Ritta Goswami and Nand Lal
r Thakur, Additional Advocate
Generals, Ms. Divya Sood, Deputy
Advocate General and Mr. Manoj
Bagga, Assistant Advocate General,
for respondents No.1 to 4 and
6/State.
Mr. Vikrant Thakur, Advocate, for
respondent No. 5.
_____________________________________________________________
Surya Kant, Chief Justice (Oral)
The petitioners have constructed their residential house on the land bearing Khasra No. 1619/2 (3 Biswa), Khasra No. 1622/1 (4 Biswa), Khasra No. 1644/2 (2 Biswa) and Khasra No. 1645/2 (1 Biswa), i.e. total measuring 0-6 Bigha, situated in Mauja Charna, Sub Tehsil Nohra, Tehsil Renukaji, District Sirmaur.
Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment? .
::: Downloaded on - 26/03/2019 21:59:29 :::HCHP -2-2. On a complaint filed against them by one Shri Yashwant Singh, proceedings under Section 163 of the Land Revenue Act were initiated and it appears that the petitioners .
have been found to have encroached upon 6 Biswa of land, which is stated to be owned by the State Government but was given to the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited.
3. Be that as it may, with a view to resolve the controversy, especially for the reason that the petitioners have constructed their residential house over the land, they have offered 1 Bigha land i.e. 3 times more than the encroached land to the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited.
It further appears that though the Authorities of the Electricity Board are willing to accept the offer which is more beneficial for the Board, but they are unable to take a final decision as 'No Objection' from the State Government is required since the land in dispute is recorded in the ownership of the State Government.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and are of the view that the State Government possibly should not have any objection to accept 01 Bigha of land in lieu of 06 Biswa of land, which is alleged to have been encroached upon by the petitioners. The land offered by the petitioners is three times than the government land. It is also not the case of the ::: Downloaded on - 26/03/2019 21:59:29 :::HCHP -3- respondents that the land offered by the petitioners is of less value or utility. Thus, the offer made by the petitioners is beneficial for the Board and the State Government from every .
angle. It will also save the residential house of the petitioners, which they have bonafidely constructed.
5. In this view of the matter, writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the offer made by the petitioners be firstly sympathetically considered by the HP Electricity Board authorities and in case, they find the offer acceptable, let the State Government also issue necessary 'No Objection' to the transaction. Needful shall be done within a period of three months. Till such time, status quo re: construction made by the petitioners shall be maintained.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition stands disposed of, so also pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
(Surya Kant) Chief Justice (Sandeep Sharma) Judge March 25, 2019 (Vikrant/yashwant) ::: Downloaded on - 26/03/2019 21:59:29 :::HCHP