Dilawar Hussain & Anr vs State Of H.P. & Ors

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

Notice confined to respondents No.1 to 3, which is waived by learned Additional Advocate General.

In view of the nature of grievance raised in this writ petition by the petitioners and the order being passed hereinafter, notice of this petition is not required to be served upon respondent No.4. Reply is also not required from the appearing respondents. The matter has accordingly been heard at this stage.

The writ records show that several villagers, including the present petitioners, lodged a complaint to the Deputy Commissioner, District Chamba, on 21.01.2013 regarding alleged encroachment made by respondent No. 4 over the Government land. This, according to the petitioners, resulted in the initiation of proceedings under Section 163 of the H.P. Land Revenue Act against respondent No. 4. The Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Chamba passed an order on 27.10.2014 (Annexure P-3) directing respondent No. 4 to deposit fine of Rs. 33,000/- and also ordered his ejectment from the land in question. Respondent No. 4 assailed this order before the Collector, Sub Division Chamba, District Chamba by preferring an appeal. The said appeal was dismissed on 04.11.2016 (Annexure P-4). Respondent No. 4 further assailed the above orders before the Divisional Commissioner, Kangra Division at Dharamshala by filing a revision petition. The said authority accepted the revision petition on 23.01.2024 (Annexure P- 7). The impugned orders passed by the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Chamba and the Collector, Sub Division Chamba were set aside. The case was remanded to the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Chamba for fresh decision in accordance with law.

Petitioners’ grievance is that, subsequent to the remand of the case, the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Chamba has not proceeded with the matter in a constructive manner and that no meaningful hearings have been held in the matter w.e.f. May, 2024.

In the above background, the petitioner has prayed for grant of following substantive relief: -

“A. That the Civil Writ Petition may please be allowed, with the direction to the respondents 1-3 to decide the matter as per law, and give appropriate direction to respondent No.3 to speed up the Trial & decide the same in time bound manner.”

Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the pendency of the case, without any final decision, is adversely affecting the rights of the petitioners over the land in question.

In view of the grievance raised by the petitioners and considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 3/competent authority to consider and decide the pending case under reference, expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months, in accordance with law. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.