BAGGA AND ANR(Not Applicable) vs STATE OF HP AND ORS(Not Applicable) — CWP/6531/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 04th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HPHC010036222026

Filing Number

CWP/3055/2026

Filing Date

17-Jan-2026

Registration No

CWP/6531/2026

Registration Date

30-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Coram

Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

04-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BAGGA AND ANR(Not Applicable)

    Adv. Radhika Gautam,Jai Ram Sharma,Jai Ram Sharma, ,Sahil Dixit,Jai Ram Sharma

  2. 2.Babu Ram(Not Applicable)

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HP AND ORS(Not Applicable)

    Adv. AG 1123

  2. 2.The Deputy Commissioner,(Not Applicable)

  3. 3.The Land Acquisition Officer cum SDM, Nalagarh,(Not Applicable)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-May-2026

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal DuaView PDF

    Case Summary: CWP No.6531 of 2026 The Himachal Pradesh High Court disposed of the petitioners' writ petition seeking land acquisition and compensation for land allegedly used by the State for road widening. Rather than granting immediate relief, the court granted the petitioners liberty to file a representation with the competent authority within three weeks, which must be decided within six weeks thereafter, after verification of whether their land was actually utilized for the road construction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-May-2026

    Office Objection

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

  4. 17-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/6531/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CWP No.6531 of 2026 The Himachal Pradesh High Court disposed of the petitioners' writ petition seeking land acquisition and compensation for land allegedly used by the State for road widening. Rather than granting immediate relief, the court granted the petitioners liberty to file a representation with the competent authority within three weeks, which must be decided within six weeks thereafter, after verification of whether their land was actually utilized for the road construction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case