Disposed¶21

Santosh Kumari v. UOI and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC8 May 2026CWP/6970/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Himachal Pradesh High Court, CWP No.6970 of 2026, Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, 08.05.2026; NHAI four-laning NH-154 Pathankot-Mandi; damage to unacquired land/house beyond right of way; Committee under State notification 08.06.2020; representation dated 03.09.2025 Annexure P-4; direction to respondent No.5 to refer case to Committee within two weeks; Committee to decide within eight weeks; Kangra, Shahpur; disposed of with directions.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.5 to send the petitioner's case to the Committee constituted under notification dated 08.06.2020 within two weeks; the Committee to consider and take appropriate action and decision in accordance with law within eight weeks thereafter; copy of the decision to be conveyed to the petitioner; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also disposed of.

Santosh Kumari Vs UOI and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent No.5 should be directed to place the petitioner's case/representations, including that dated 03.09.2025 (Annexure P-4), before the Committee constituted under notification dated 08.06.2020 for appropriate action in accordance with law regarding damage to her unacquired house/land adjoining the NHAI four-laning works.

¶4

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.5 to send the petitioner's case for consideration before the Committee constituted under notification dated 08.06.2020 within two weeks, whereafter the Committee shall consider and take appropriate action and decision on the issues in accordance with law within eight weeks, and a copy of the decision shall be conveyed to the petitioner.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

The Court took note that a notification dated 08.06.2020 issued by the State of Himachal Pradesh (Annexure P-5) exists for resolving issues such as those raised in the writ petition, and on that basis heard the matter at this stage without calling for replies from the respondents.

¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (CWP No.6970 of 2026, decided 08.05.2026, High Court of H.P., Shimla) filed by Santosh Kumari, whose land in Village 39 Miles, Mohal Shahpur, District Kangra was acquired by NHAI for four-laning of NH-154 Pathankot-Mandi section. She alleged that unscientific construction damaged the courtyard and walls of two rooms of her unacquired adjoining house, rendering it unsafe and inhabitable, and that her representations, including one dated 03.09.2025 (Annexure P-4) seeking valuation of damages through the Committee constituted under the State's notification dated 08.06.2020 (Annexure P-5), had neither been redressed nor placed before the Committee. Taking note of the existing notification, the Court disposed of the petition at the hearing stage without calling for replies, directing respondent No.5 to send the petitioner's case to the Committee within two weeks, with the Committee to act in accordance with law within eight weeks thereafter and convey its decision to the petitioner.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.6970 of 2026 Decided on: 08.05.2026 _________________________________________________________________ Santosh Kumari ....Petitioner Versus Union of India. & Ors …Respondents ________________________________________________________________ Coram_

¶3

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

¶4

1 Whether approved for reporting?

¶5

_________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Ram Lal Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Narender Thakur, Central Govt. Counsel for respondent No.1. Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate, for respondents No. 2 and 3. Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Y.P.S.Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General for respondents No. 4 and 5.

¶6

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶7

Notice. Mr. Narender Thakur, learned Central

¶8

Government Counsel, Ms. Shreya Chauhan, learned counsel and Mr. Y.P.S.Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General ,

¶9

appear and waive service of notice on behalf of the respective

¶10

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

¶11

¶12

respondents.

¶13

2. Keeping in view the grievance raised by the petitioner and the relief prayed for by her, there is no requirement to call for reply from the respondents. The matter has accordingly been heard at this stage.

¶14

3. The case set up is that respondent-State issued a notification on 08.06.2020 constituting a Committee to resolve and sort out all issues including the issues of assessing damage occurred to the private lands, buildings and structures beyond the right of way due to construction of four laning projects of respondent-National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) in the State of Himachal Pradesh. NHAI started construction for four laning/ widening/ maintenance and operation of NH-154 Pathankot-Mandi section in revenue Village Shahpur, Tehsil Shahpur, District Kangra, H.P. Petitioner’s land situated in Village 39 Miles, Mohal Shahpur, Patwar Circle Shahpur, Kanungo Circle Rihlu, District Kangra comprised in Khata No. 634/598, Khatauni No. 794/773 and Khasra No.2361/1802/1554 was acquired by the NHAI for the purpose of construction of the aforesaid road. Petitioner alleges that because of

¶15

¶16

construction work of the aforesaid highway having not been carried out in a scientific manner, her courtyard, walls of two rooms of her house adjoining to the aforesaid acquired land, have also been damaged. Petitioner’s house/land that has

¶17

not been acquired, has been rendered unsafe and inhabitable. Petitioner’s representation preferred to the respondents including one submitted on 03.09.2025 (Annexure P-4) has not been redressed. Petitioner has also requested therein for valuation of the damages to her house/land adjoining to her land that was acquired by the NHAI through the Committee constituted under notification dated 08.06.2020, but till date, petitioner’s case has not been placed before the Committee.

¶18

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied in case respondent No.5 is directed to place case of the petitioner/representations preferred by her including dated 03.09.2025 (Annexure P-4) before the Committee constituted under notification dated 08.06.2020 for appropriate action in accordance with law.

¶19

5. Taking note of the fact that there does exist a notification dated 08.06.2020 issued by the State of Himachal Pradesh (Annexure P-5) for resolving the issues, such like the

¶20

¶21

ones raised in the present writ petition, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.5 to send the case of the petitioner for consideration before the aforesaid Committee within a period of two weeks from today, whereafter, the Committee shall consider and take appropriate action and decision on the issues in accordance with law, within eight weeks thereafter. Copy of decision be conveyed to the petitioner.

¶22

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of.

¶23

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

¶24

May 08, 2026 R.Atal

Santosh Kumari v. UOI and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumari v. UOI and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radha Devi Vs State of Hp and Others

Ram Paul Vs the State of Hp and Others

Narinder Kumar Vs the State of Hp and Others

Meera Devi Vs State of Hp and Others

Principal Dr. Radha Krishnan Government Medical College Hamirpur Vs Sudesh Kumari

Amarjeet Singh Vs Nipun Jindal and Anr.