CWP/14053/2026 on 15 October 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.14053 of 2026

Date of Decision: 15.10.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Sital Singh ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents

Coram

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?

For the Petitioner: Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Surya Chauhan, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General. __________________________________________________________________________

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

Vide order dated 25.3.2003, Collector, Nalagarh, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, while allowing the appeal filed by the petitioner herein under Section 14 of H.P. Land Revenue Act, set aside order dated 23.7.2001 passed by learned AC 1st Grade, Nalagarh, in Partition Case No. 76/97 in respect of land comprising khata No. 15/19 to 26 measuring 63-9 bighas, situate in village Kulari, Pargana Gullarwala, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh and directed the court below to adopt proper procedure and start partition proceedings in all the joint khatas afresh after taking partition application of the other two joint khatas.

2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, learned senior counsel representing the petitioner is that though in terms of directions contained in the aforesaid order dated 25.3.2003 (Annexure P-3), parties to the lis including the petitioner attempted to submit fresh applications to the court of AC1st Grade for fresh partition, but such applications were not accepted on the ground that the file has not been received back from the office of Collector.

3. Since for the last so many years, applications attempted to be filed by the petitioner as well as respondents never came to be entertained by AC 1st Grade, petitioner approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for following main directions: "a) That a writ of Certiorari may very kindly be issued thereby quashing order dated 16.01.2025, Annexure P-8.

b) That respondents No 1 to 3 may be directed to trace or reconstruct file of partition case file No. 76/97 titled as Ajmer Singh versus Pyara Singh and others and take the partition proceedings to its logical end or start partition proceeding de novo and decide the same in a time bound manner.

c) That till the time case of partition is not decided the respondents may be restrained from demarcating the suit land.

d) That the matter may be remanded back for proper adjudication and an opportunity of being heard may be granted to petitioner.”

4. Having taken note of aforesaid pleadings, on 17.8.2026, this Court passed following order: "Notice confined at this stage to respondents No.1 to 3 which is waived of by Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General. The case set up by the petitioner is that partition application moved by the predecessor of respondents No. 5 to 8 was processed. Partition was accepted on 23.07.2001. Petitioner carried the matter further in an appeal by assailing the final partition order dated 23.07.2001. The appeal was allowed by the Collector, Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P. on 25.3.2003. Final partition order was quashed and the matter was remanded with direction to the Court below to adopt the proper procedure and start partition proceedings in all the joint khatas denovo after taking partition applications of the other two joint khatas as well. The parties were directed to appear before learned Court below (Assistant Collector 1st Grade) on 08.04.2003. It is further pleaded for the petitioner that no meaningful hearings have taken place in last 23 years in the Court of Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Nalagarh. Attention was also invited to the representation preferred by the petitioner before the Divisional Commissioner seeking implementation of order passed by the Collector. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner also referred to some more documents on record to submit that the order passed by the Collector has not been implemented on the spot. That instead of starting with the partition proceedings afresh as directed by the Collector, Nalagarh in the order dated 25.03.2003, the Sub- Divisional Collector, Nalagarh vide order dated 16.01.2025 (Annexure P-8) informed the petitioner that in the interregnum because of several changes that have taken place in the revenue record etc.

instead of getting the order passed dated 26.03.2003 implemented, he should move the appropriate Court for appropriate relief. Learned Additional Advocate General to have instruction in the matter (i) as to why the order dated 25.03.2003 passed by the Collector allowing the appeal preferred by the petitioner has remained unimplemented till date; (ii) as to why order cannot be implemented at this stage as well and who is responsible for the delay."

5. On 31.8.2026, learned Additional Advocate General placed on record instructions dated 29.8.2026 issued under signatures of respondents No. 1 to 3, but having regard to the nature of dispute and sensitivity of the matter, this Court found it necessary to call upon aforementioned authority to file affidavit stating therein the facts as are recorded in the aforementioned instructions. This Court specifically called upon aforementioned authority to apprise this Court “whether pursuant to order dated 25.3.2003 passed by the Collector, Nalagarh, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, partition proceedings were started afresh in all joint khatas after taking partition applications of other two joint khatas or not?”

6. In the aforementioned backdrop, compliance affidavit dated 3.10.2026 has been filed by Tehsildar-cum-Assistant Collector 1st Grade Nalagarh, wherein it is stated as under:

"1. That Revenue Appeal No. 44/VIII of 2002 titled as “Sital Singh v/s Ajmer Singh”, was accepted by the then Collector, Nalagarh and the partition of joint holding was quashed with the directions to the court below to initiate the fresh partition proceedings in all the joint khatas after obtaining the fresh partition applications in respect of the other two joint khatas. The concerned parties were directed to appear before the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Nalagarh on 08.04.2003.

2. That the petitioner, Sh. Sital Singh submitted an application dated 11.10.2024 before the Sub Divisional Collector, Nalagarh, seeking implementation of the order dated 25.03.2003 and the same was forwarded to the Naib Tehsildar, Panjehra, vide their office letter No. NLG/SDM/Misc./2024-1806 dated 11.10.2024 for necessary action in accordance with the law. As the matter now falls within the jurisdiction of Sub-Tehsil, Panjehra, which was created in the year 2017 and need to be dealt by Naib Tehsildar, Panjehra.

3. That in order to ascertain compliance with the aforesaid directions of the then Collector, Nalagarh the available and revenue record of the relevant period, including the old revenue record, partition register, partition proceeding files, consigned files, diary/ dispatch registers, challan files, transferred files and other connected revenue record was thoroughly scrutinized and perused. However a committee comprising of office staff members was constituted vide this office letter no. NLG/Teh/Supdt./2026-262-268 dated 14-09- 2026 to submit a detailed factual report indicating the steps undertaken and the result of the search to the Tehsildar, Nalagarh.

4. That despite the aforesaid exercise and scrutiny of the available record, no fresh applications or partition proceedings pursuant to the order dated 25.03.2003 passed by the Collector, Nalagarh, could be traced from the record presently available in this office. Also the committee submitted its report mentioning that the relevant record pertaining to that Partition file could not be traced despite the best efforts made by the committee.

5. That, accordingly, on the basis of the record presently available in the office of the Tehsildar, Nalagarh, and Naib Tehsildar, Panjehra there is no material presently available on record which can conclusively ascertain whether pursuant to the order dated 25.03.2003, fresh partition proceedings were actually initiated in all the joint khatas after obtaining partition applications in respect of other two joint khatas or not. But the actual case file could not be traced."

7. Perusal of afore reply reveals that petitioner submitted an application dated 11.10.2024 before the Sub Divisional Collector, Nalagarh, praying therein for implementation of order dated 25.3.2003 and same was forwarded to Naib Tehsildar, Panjehra, vide communication dated 11.10.2024 for necessary action.

8. In order to ascertain compliance of the directions issued by Collector, Nalagarh, record was scrutinized and perused. However, committee constituted to look into the matter submitted its report dated 14.9.2026 indicating the steps undertaken and result of the search to Tehsildar Nalagarh.

9. Despite extensive exercise and scrutiny of available record, no application or partition proceedings pursuant to order dated 25.3.2003 passed by the Collector Nalagarh could be traced from the record in the office. Committee submitted report mentioning that relevant record pertaining to the partition file could not be traced despite the best efforts made by the committee.

10. In these peculiar circumstances, learned Additional Advocate General states that let the petitioner file fresh application for partition along with relevant documents, especially proceedings decided by the Collector, enabling the Tehsildar, Nalagarh, to proceed further in accordance with order dated 25.3.2003.

11. Consequently, in view of above, this Court without going into the merits of the case deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the petitioner to submit fresh application for partition strictly in terms of observations and findings given in order dated 25.3.2003 passed by Tehsildar, Nalagarh. Ordered accordingly. While doing so, he may also enclose the pleadings of appeal as well as order passed in appeal decided by the Collector, enabling the concerned Tehsildar, Nalagarh, to proceed further in accordance with law.

12. Since considerable time has already elapsed, this Court hopes and trusts that Tehsildar, Nalagarh shall do the needful expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months after affording opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as other stakeholders. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly. October 15, 2026

(Sandeep Sharma), (manjit)

Judge