Himachal Pradesh High Court
Sushil Chander vs Union Of India And Ors on 21 March, 2018
Bench: Sanjay Karol, Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Ex.Petition No. 95 of 2017 Date of Decision: 21.3.2018 ____ Sushil Chander .....Petitioner.
.
Versus Union of India and Ors. ....Respondents. Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice.
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. C.D. Negi, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, ASGI, for respondents No. 1, 3 and 4.
Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General with Mr. Ajay Vaidya, Senior Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ranjan Sharma, r Mr. Adarsh Sharma & Mr. Nand Lal Thakur, AdditionalAdvocate Generals and Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General, for the State.
_______ Sanjay Karol, ACJ. (oral) Deputy Commissioner, Kinnaur, has filed affidavit dated 16.2.2018, inter-alia making following averments:-
" In the rest contents of the para, it is submitted that the replying Respondent No.2 hold the Hon'ble Court in upmost esteem and regard and is making every efforts to ensure the compliance of the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court dated on 26th December, 2016. It is further submitted that the process for acquisition of the said land was initially started as per the provision of Land Acquisition Act, 1994 but due to the enactment of Right to fair Compensation And Transparency in the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act-2013, the process was started afresh as per the provisions of the new Act.2013. The case for acquisition of the said land has been sent to Govt. of H.P. vides this office letter No. KNR-7-3 (DRA)/1060511 dated 28- 12-2017 for the necessary permission/directions. A copy of letter dated 28-12-2017 is annexed as Annexure R-1. The replying Respondent will make all the efforts to complete the acquisition Process within the time frame contained in the Act, 2013."1
Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2018 23:10:28 :::HCHP...2...
2. In view of the intervening developments, we close the .
present proceedings, reserving liberty to the petitioner to revive the present petition, if so required and desired, after a period of three months. Petition stands disposed of, so also pending applications, if any.
( Sanjay Karol),
Acting Chief Justice
21st March, 2018 ( Sandeep Sharma ),
Manjit/shankar
r Judge.
::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2018 23:10:28 :::HCHP