Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/2645/2012 of BHIM SINGH BOHRA Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND and OTHERS on 31 December 2013
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 2645 (MS) of 2012 Bhim Singh Bohra ……Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand & others ……..Respondents Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) Mr. D.S. Mehta, Advocate, present for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Paresh
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITALWrit Petition No. 2645 (MS) of 2012
Bhim Singh Bohra
……Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ……..Respondents Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)
Mr. D.S. Mehta, Advocate, present for the petitioner.
2. Mr. Paresh Tripathi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, present for the State/respondents.
3. The petitioner, by means of the present writ petition, seeks a writ of mandamus against the respondents to grant him compensation, as the respondents, particularly, respondent no. 3, have occupied his agricultural land since 2007.
4. Respondents/Public Works Department admits the position that the land of the petitioner was used for dumping and storage of construction material. Loss to the petitioner has also been valued by the department to the tune of`37,393/- (rupees thirty seven thousand three hundred and ninety three) in the year 2011, which is Annexure No. 1 to the Counter Affidavit.
5. As this is the admitted position by the respondents that they have used the agricultural land of the petitioner and presently they are in its occupation and the fact that they have admitted the fact that in the year 2011 petitioner has suffered a loss of `37,393/- (rupees thirty seven thousand three hundred and ninety three) writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent no. 2 & 3 to hand over peaceful possession of the property to the petitioner within one month from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before them.
6. Since a loss of compensation has already been admitted by the respondent nos. 2 & 3 to the tune of`37,393/-(rupees thirty seven thousand three hundred and ninety three) which was up to the year 2011. In December, 2013 this figure is liable to increase. A reasonable figure, even taking into account the figure of the respondents, would now be`60,000/- (rupees sixty thousand) or near about.
7. The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with the direction that Public Works Department shall give a compensation of`60,000/- (rupees sixty thousand) to the petitioner within four weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before them.
ML
(Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.)
31.12.2013