No direction under Article 226 of the Constitution against the State to initiate land acquisition proceedings in respect of land after lapse of sufficient time could be issued.
For the purposes of road construction notification under Section 4 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 was issued several times for publication but each time the same, as stated, was allowed to be elapsed deliberately. No compensation was also paid to land owners. State on the other hand contended a road has already been constructed on the basis of verbal consent and request of the land owners and they also took part in the construction of said road and they also raised no objection during construction work. Claim of compensation was also stated to have been raised after 20 years and thus the same was not maintainable.
There were evidences that road in question was in place much before the present writ was filed. It was held that no direction under Article 226 of the Constitution against the State to initiate land acquisition proceedings in respect of land after lapse of sufficient time could be issued. The claim was held to be not maintainable by following the principle of delay and latches in approaching the Court after an inordinate and unexplained delay. However, where the party had already initiated action, the state was directed to pay the compensation as directed by Court in the concerned proceedings.
[Jai Singh & Ors. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.]
(Himachal Pradesh HC, 12.11.2014)