Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 359 (HP)

Vinod Kumar Guleria v. State of H. P.

2025-03-12

AJAY MOHAN GOEL

body2025
JUDGMENT : (Ajay Mohan Goel, J.) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has primarily prayed for the following reliefs:- “(i) That writ of certiorari may kindly be issued, quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 04.09.2023 (Annexure-F). (ii) That writ of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondent authorities to construct the remaining 30% ambulance road from Pipal Chowk via Neola Nalla chowk to Twambda Nala through Harijan Basti consisting of 25 to 30 families, within a time bound manner, so that the poor people can also get the benefit of ambulance road in case of any emergency, since 70% of the said ambulance road has already been constructed from 2015 to 2020 from the private lands and now only 30% road has to be constructed only through the Government land and permission thereto of the Forest is within the Deputy Commissioner, Mandi, H.P. and further, petitioner may kindly be associated in the execution of the said road for better assistance. (iii) That the action may kindly be ordered to be initiated against the erring officers/officials, who have attempted to file wrong affidavits before this Hon'ble Court, stating therein that in the year 2023, there is objection of private land owners for the construction on Khasra No. 152, whereas the road on Khasra No. 152 has already been constructed from the year 2015 to 2020 as per the record available with the Gram Panchayat.” 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by Annexure–F, in terms whereof, the representation of the petitioner has been answered by the Authorities pursuant to the directions passed in CWP No. 1386 of 2019 in the following terms:- “Whereas, representation No. nil dated 30-12- 2022 addressed to this office amongst others received from Sh. Vinod kumar Guleria, (Member, Distt. Red Cross Society) S/o Sh. Satish Kumar Guleria Village Devdhar Manthia/Fatehwahan, P.O Talyark. Tehsil Sadar, Distt. Mandi (H.P.) (Petitioner) with request to comply with the directions issued by the Hon'ble High Court on dated 27-12-2022, while deciding the CWP No. 1386/2019. Whereas, the Hon'ble High Court in his decision in C.W.P 1986-2019 on dated 27-12-2022 has admitted at point No. 4 that the remaining 30% of the road Cannot be constructed unless the co- sharers of the family of the petitioner are willing to donate the lands to the Gram Panchayat. Whereas, the Hon'ble High Court in his decision in C.W.P 1986-2019 on dated 27-12-2022 has admitted at point No. 4 that the remaining 30% of the road Cannot be constructed unless the co- sharers of the family of the petitioner are willing to donate the lands to the Gram Panchayat. The Hon'ble Court has directed that as and when the petitioner to prevail upon the said co-sharers to donate their land to the Gram Panchayat for the purpose of construction of the remaining 30% of the road, the petitioner may communicate the same to the Authorities. Whereas, the petitioner sent above mentioned representation without taking consent of the co-sharers of the land bearing Khasra No. 152. Whereas. Junior Engineer of Development Block Sadar Mandi inspected the site on dated 27-03-2023 alongwith Pradhan, Gram Panchayat, Ward Member and residents of the Village. Whereas, Pradhan Gram Panchayat Manthla was again requested to make the efforts to process the matter for construction of the remaining road in Village Manthila from Peepal Chowk to Naun. The resolution was placed by the Pradhan in Gram Panchayat's meeting on dated 17-08-2023 and after detailed discussion resolution was passed that for the constriction of this road, private land is to be used for which owner of the lands did not agree In future, if they will give their consent then construction work of the read can be started. Whereas, the efforts were again made by the Pradhan Gram Panchayat Manthla on dated 21-08- 2023 to seek the consent of the co-sharer of the land 3 Co sharers out of 10 co-sharers of the land bearing Khasra No. 152 signed the joint statement on dated 21-08-2023 that they are the co-sharer of land bearing Khasra No. 152, which is agricultural land and they don't want to construct mad on this land, because they do not need of any path/road from this land & same position has been placed before Hon'ble High Court in reply of CWP No. 1386/2019. In view of the aforesaid discussion, representation dated 30-12-2022 of Sh. Vinod kumar Guleria, (Member, Distt. Red Cross Society) S/o Sh. Satish Kumar Guleria, Village Devdhar Manthla/ Fatehwahan, P.O. Talhyarh, Tehsil Sadar, Distt. Mandi (H.P.) (Petitioner) is hereby rejected.” 3. In view of the aforesaid discussion, representation dated 30-12-2022 of Sh. Vinod kumar Guleria, (Member, Distt. Red Cross Society) S/o Sh. Satish Kumar Guleria, Village Devdhar Manthla/ Fatehwahan, P.O. Talhyarh, Tehsil Sadar, Distt. Mandi (H.P.) (Petitioner) is hereby rejected.” 3. The stand of the respondents is that the Ambulance road cannot be constructed from the Government land due to its steep gradient and inadequate width and further the available government land is not meeting the requisite criteria for road construction, which is necessitating the use of the private land for said purpose. This is even evident from the latest counter affidavit that has been filed by the Deputy Commissioner, Mandi, dated 11.03.2025 to the affidavit filed by the petitioner dated 13.12.2024, which has been handed over by learned Additional Advocate General in the Court itself, which is taken on record. It is mentioned in para-3 of this counter affidavit that Khasra No. 152 and 96 are both privately owned with multiple co-sharers, majority of whom are unwilling to part with their land for the proposed road construction and father of the petitioner is a joint owner in Khasra Nos. 152 and 96 alongwith nine other co-sharers and for the purpose of maintaining the required gradient for the proposed road construction through Khasra Nos. 96 and 152, it is necessary to obtain a ‘No Objection Certificate’ and a written affidavit from all ten co-sharers confirming their consent and waiver of any claim for compensation for the utilization of their land for road construction. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner insisted that the road can be constructed from the government land but this Court has no reason to disbelieve the affidavit that has been filed by the Deputy Commissioner, Mandi. This Court called upon learned Counsel for the petitioner to ensure that NOCs are obtained from the co-sharers of the private land so that necessary directions could be passed for the construction of road in issue but learned Counsel for the petitioner was unable to give assurance to this effect. When private individuals are not willing to give NOC for their land, this Court cannot issue a mandamus directing the respondents to construct road in issue through the private land. The writ petition is accordingly closed. When private individuals are not willing to give NOC for their land, this Court cannot issue a mandamus directing the respondents to construct road in issue through the private land. The writ petition is accordingly closed. However, it is clarified that closure of this writ petition will not come in the way of the Authorities to carry out the construction of the Ambulance road, in case, land owners do give their land for the purpose of construction of the road in issue, in future. The petition stands disposed of in above terms, so also pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.