Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J
1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought the following reliefs:-
“i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to adhere and act in accordance with the mandatory
provisions of the “The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013†prior to
taking any coercive or other action insofar as the petitioner’s property (being Khata no. 00002 Khasra no. 2 Ka Min., Village Haldwani Malli,
Pargana Bhavar 6 Khata, Tehsil Haldwani, District Naiital), in the interest of justice.
ii) Quash the entire proceedings initiated by the respondents by way of which they are intending to demolish the property of the petitioner, including the
report / order dated Nil (Annexure no. 1) issued by the respondent no. 5 Committee, insofar as they are proceeding with the demolition drive, without
first determining the adequate amount of compensation in accordance with the mandatory provisions of the “The Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013â€.
iii) Issue any other or further writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
iv) To award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner.â€
2. According to the petitioner, he owns an immovable property consisting of land and building at Mangal Parao, Haldwani, District Nainital, which is
likely to be affected, due to widening of Bareilly-Nainital road.
3. According to the petitioner, since there is no dispute regarding his title over the said immovable property, therefore, if his property has to be
disturbed for road widening, then he has to be appropriately compensated.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to remove that portion of his building, which falls within 12 meters from the
centre of the Bareilly-Nainital road and all the petitioner wants is some reasonable time for demolishing the existing structure and also for constructing
the supporting pillars.
5. Mr. Sunil Khera, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand, per contra submits that as per the communication received from
National Highways Authority of India, the right of way is 15 meters from the centre of the Bareilly-Nainital road. However, the Administration has
taken a decision to minimize the damage to the adjoining structure and to reduce the right of way for the time being to 12 meters. He further submits
that several persons, who were likely to be affected due to the road-widening work, have already approached a Committee, constituted pursuant to the
orders passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court and the said Committee will determine the compensation, if at all is payable to any person for his /
her immovable property. He submits that the petitioner can also be relegated to the said Committee, which will look into the quantum of compensation
payable to the petitioner.
6. In view of the undertaking given by the petitioner through his counsel, petitioner is permitted to remove the part of the structure, which is falling
within 12 meters from the centre of the Bareilly-Nainital road, within 30 days from today. Petitioner shall be at liberty to make an Application for
compensation to the concerned Committee.
7. This Court hopes and expects that the said Committee shall determine the amount, if any, payable as compensation to the petitioner as soon as
possible, but not later than three months from the date of making the said application.
8. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is disposed of.
