The High Court disposed of an appeal against the Single Judge's judgment upholding status as an encroacher on public land.
The appeal is disposed of. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
| LPA Decided |
No. on Ju |
63 of 2017 ly 5, 2017 |
|---|---|---|
| Muni Lal ……… Versus |
…… | .Appellant |
| State of Himachal Pradesh and others …… ------------------------------------------------------------------ Coram |
….R ------ |
espondents ------------- |
| Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Jus Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge Whether approved for reporting? |
tice | |
| For the appellant Ms. Seema K. Guleria, |
Adv | ocate. |
| For the respondents Mr. Shrawan Dog |
ra, | Advocate |
| General with Mr. Additional Advocate |
Anu Gener |
p Rattan, al and Mr. |
| J.K. Verma, Dep General. |
uty | Advocate |
| Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice(oral): |
Findings, concurrent in nature, of the authorities, with regard to status of the present appellant, being an encroacher, came to be minutely examined by the learned Single Judge of this Court in CWP No. 4940 of 2011 titled Shri Muni Lal versus State of Himachal
Pradesh and others, decided on 11.5.2017, filed by the appellant under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
of being an encroacher on public land. Proceedings for ejectment initiated under the provisions of HP Public Premises and Land
1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? .
2
(Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1971, can not be said to be without jurisdiction.
others .
In view of above, the appeal is disposed of. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.
(Sanjay Karol) Acting Chief Justice
(Sandeep Sharma) Judge
July 5, 2017 (vikrant)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether this Court should interfere with the Single Judge's judgment affirming the revenue authorities' finding that the appellant is an encroacher.
Whether the appellant's contention for compensation regarding the superstructure is a maintainable challenge in these proceedings.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Muni Lal
State of Himachal Pradesh
Sanjay Karol
Sandeep Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
