Allowed

Ram Swaroop v. State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC14 Jul 2023CWP/1121/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh allowed a writ petition seeking the setting aside of an impugned order regarding land mutation. The Court quashed the order and entire proceedings initiated by the Sub Divisional Collector due to legal infirmities in the application and decision-making process.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 12.1.2023 is set aside, and the entire proceedings initiated by the Sub Divisional Collector or any other revenue agency are treated as void and quashed and set aside.

Ram Swaroop Vs State of Hp and Others — Land Acquisition | Himachal Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No. 1121 of 2023.

¶3

Date of decision : 14.7.2023. Ram Swaroop ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & others ...Respondents

¶4

Coram:

¶5

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.

¶6

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge.

¶7

Whether approved for reporting?¹ For the petitioner : Mr. Hamender Singh Chandel, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Ramakant Sharma and Ms. Sharmila Patial, Addl. A.Gs, Ms. Priyanka Chauhan, Dy. A.G. and Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Law Officer, for respondents No. 1 to 5.

¶8

Mr. Romesh Verma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Hitesh Thakur, Advocate, for respondent No.6.

¶9

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (Oral)

¶10

The instant petition has been filed for the grant of

¶11

the following substantive reliefs:-

¶12

“i) That the impugned order dated 12.1.2023 Annexure P-19, passed by respondent No.3 may be held illegal and set aside.

¶13

ii) That the process adopted by respondent Non.3 on the application seeking review may be hald illegal

¶14

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

¶15

-2-

¶16

and in violation of the provisions of HP Land Revenue Act and HP village common Lands Vesting and Utilization Act, 1974.

¶17

iii) That the mutation No. 147 dated 29.9.2015, whereby conferment of proprietary rights was reflected may be held to be legal and valid.”

¶18

Perusal of record, more particularly, the application for cancellation of Mutation No. 147, dated 29.9.2015 of Mauza Kanda, Tehsil and District Shimla, would go to show that the same was not in conformity with law, inasmuch as, the applicant therein had not at all even remotely indicated as to whether he was the estate holder in Mauza Kanda. Therefore, he was not entitled to file the application and what is still worse is that the Sub Divisional Collector forwarded the application to the Field Kanungo for compliance without any application of mind. The application once filed, had to disclose locus as also the cause of action. However, both these informations were conspicuously absent in the application.

¶19

That apart, the manner in which the Sub Divisional Collector has decided the matter by not passing an order and simply addressing a communication to Tehsildar, leaves much to desire and that apart is not permissible under law, as already held by this Court in CWP No. 3105 of 2022 , titled as,

¶20

-3-

¶21

Liaq Ram Sharma vs. State of H.P. & others , decided on 24.8.2022 .

¶22

Accordingly, we find merit in this petition and therefore not only the impugned order dated 12.1.2023 (Annexure P-19) is set aside but the entire proceedings initiated by the Sub Divisional Collector or any other revenue agency pursuant to directions issued by the Sub Divisional Collector are treated as void and accordingly quashed and set aside. However, it is made clear that this order shall not come in the way of any party, if aggrieved by the action of the official respondents to approach the authorities concerned, in accordance with law.

¶23

In view of above, the present petition is disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶24

(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge.

¶25

(Satyen Vaidya) 14^th July, 2023 Judge (kck)

Ram Swaroop v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Swaroop v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Hp Vs Sachin Kumar

State of Hp Vs Majinder Pal @ Rohit @ Tinku

Chandu Ram Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Sunita Devi Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Surinder Singh Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Saif Ali Vs State of Hp and Ors.