HC directs Himachal govt to pay relief for land used in 2008 to construct road in Sirmaur

The case pertains to land situated in Mohal Borar of Shillai tehsil in Sirmaur district, which was used for constructing the Lani-Borar road

The Himachal Pradesh high court has directed the state government to initiate land acquisition proceedings and pay adequate compensation to a landowner whose six bighas of land in Sirmaur district were used for road construction in 2008 without formal acquisition or payment.

The court held that the petitioner was a rightful co-owner when the land was utilised for road construction and was, therefore, entitled to have his claim considered in accordance with law. (HT Photo for representation)

Disposing of a writ petition filed by Bali Ram, justice Sandeep Sharma directed the concerned authorities to complete the acquisition process within two months after carrying out proper demarcation of the land.

The case pertains to land situated in Mohal Borar of Shillai tehsil in Sirmaur district, which was used for constructing the Lani-Borar road. The petitioner approached the HC alleging that despite the land being used for a public road for nearly 18 years, the state had neither formally acquired it nor paid him compensation.

Opposing the petition, the state government argued that the petitioner was not recorded as an owner when the road was constructed. It also submitted that his brother had issued a no-objection certificate (NOC) in June 2007 permitting the construction.

Rejecting the state’s contentions, the court observed that one co-owner cannot surrender or relinquish the rights of other joint owners by issuing an NOC without their authorisation.

On the question of ownership, the court noted that revenue records established the petitioner’s status as a legal heir to the property following his mother’s death in 2005. His name, however, was inadvertently omitted during a revenue mutation in 2009.

The omission was subsequently rectified by the concerned patwari in May 2026, confirming the petitioner’s equal share in the land.

The court held that the petitioner was a rightful co-owner when the land was utilised for road construction and was, therefore, entitled to have his claim considered in accordance with law.

Directing the authorities to expedite the process, the HC asked them to follow the principles laid down by the Supreme Court and earlier HC judgments concerning delayed land acquisition and the rights of landowners to compensation.