Himachal Pradesh High Court
Rattan Dassi vs Bharat Khera on 29 June, 2022
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
.
ON THE 29th DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHARMA
CIVIL ORIGINAL PETITION CONTEMPT No. 149 of 2022
Between:
RATTAN DASSI,
W/O LATE BHUMI DEV,
R/O VILLAGE BESLI.
PO DANSA, TEHSIL RAMPUR,
DISTRICT SHIMLA, HP.
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS.
r ....PETITIONER
(BY MR. DALEEP SINGH KAITH,
ADVOCATE)
AND
BHARAT KHERA,
S/O NOT KNOWN,
PRESENTLY SECRETARY (PWD),
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
....RESPONDENT/CONTEMNOR
(BY MR. SUDHIR BHATNAGAR,
ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
Whether approved for reporting?.
This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court passed the following:
ORDER
::: Downloaded on - 30/06/2022 20:02:40 :::CIS
2
By way of present contempt petition, prayer has been made on .
behalf of the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent for his having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the directions contained in judgment dated 11.1.2018, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 111 of 2018, whereby the writ petition having been filed by the petitioner came to be disposed of with direction to the respondent to decide the representation, praying therein for acquisition of the land of the petitioner within eight weeks. Sine despite petitioner's having filed representation, no steps, if any, ever came to be taken at the behest of the respondent for acquisition of land, petitioner was compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings.
2. Pursuant to notice issued in the instant proceedings, Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record, communication dated 25.6.2022, issued under the signature of Superintending Engineer, Rampur, XITH Circle, HPPWD, Rampur, enclosing therewith copy of order dated 20.6.2022. Aforesaid communication is taken on record, perusal whereof clearly reveals that respondent has now decided to acquire the land and in that regard, papers have been forwarded to the competent authority for issuance of notification under Section 11 of the land Acquisition Act, 2013 and as such, there ::: Downloaded on - 30/06/2022 20:02:40 :::CIS 3 appears to be no reason for this Court to keep the present petition alive and .
otherwise also, no action of the respondents can be said to be contumacious.
3. Consequently, in view of the above, contempt proceedings are closed and notice issued to the respondent is discharged. However having taken note of the fact that judgment alleged to have been violated was passed in the year, 2018 and till date, directions contained in the judgment have not been complied with, this Court hopes and trusts that needful in terms of communication dated 20.6.2022, as noted herein above, shall be done expeditiously, preferably within two weeks.
29th June, 2022 (Sandeep Sharma),
(manjit) Judge
::: Downloaded on - 30/06/2022 20:02:40 :::CIS