Jaipal Singh vs State Of H.P. And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 1748 HP

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                                                         CWP No. 1264 of 2021
                                                         Decided on: 06.03.2021




                                                                                      .

        Jaipal Singh                                                              .......Petitioner
                                                     Versus
        State of H.P. and others                                             ......Respondents





        Coram
        The Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Narayana Swamy, Chief Justice.
        The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara, Judge.





        Whether approved for reporting?1
        For the petitioner:                        Mr.    Ramakant                        Sharma,
                                                   Advocate.
        For the respondents:
                                 rMs. Ritta Goswami, Addl. A.G
                                  with Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Addl.

                                  A.G and Mr. Nand Lal Thakur,
                                  Dy. A.G for the respondent-
                                  State.
         L. Narayana Swamy, Chief Justice (Oral)

The prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to

respondents No. 1 and 2 i.e. State of Himachal Pradesh through

Secretary and to the District Collector, Kangra to correct the

revenue records by deleting the wrong entries made in favour of

respondents No. 3 and 5 and their predecessors-in-interest

against the land of the petitioner in Khata No. 9, Khatauni No.

48, Khasra Nos. 77, 91 and 168 Kita-3, measuring 17 Kanal 3

marlas, Khata No. 9, Khatauni No. 51, Khasra No. 90, Kita 1,

measuring 37 Kanal 1 Marla, Khata No. 10, Khatauni No. 52,

Khasra Nos. 174 and 175, Kita 2, measuring 1 Kanal 19 Marla

situated at Tika and Mauza Jassur, Tehsil and District Kangra,

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

H.P., as per jamabandi for the year 1924-25. The petitioner has

also made a prayer to direct respondents No. 1 and 2 to decide

.

the representation dated 26.11.2016 Annexure P-2 and dated

25.10.2019 Annexure P-6.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

respondents have entered wrong entry in favour of respondents

No. 3 and 5 of the land belonging to the petitioner and this is

sought to be rectified by deleting their names and by inserting

petitioner's name. Since it is respondents No. 1 and 2 who had

not taken any action, a petition has been filed before this Court

bearing CWP No. 265 of 2018, which was decided on 27.02.2018.

This Court while deciding the matter, permitted the petitioner to

withdraw the writ petition, reserving liberty to him to pursue the

matter with the authorities concerned before whom the matter is

already pending. After the writ petition was withdrawn, he has

approached respondents No. 1 and 2 by making a representation

Annexure P-6 and in the operative portion of the same, it is

stated that the judgment dated 27.02.2018 passed in CWP No.

265 of 2018 titled as Jai Pal Singh Vs. State of H.P and others be

implemented. Since the representation dated 25.10.2019 has

not been disposed of, he has approached this Court for a

direction to respondents No. 1 and 2 to delete the names of

respondents No. 3 and 5. These corrections relate to jamabandi

for the year 1924-25 onwards.

3. Learned Additional Advocate General, on the other

hand, submits that the petition being mis-conceived deserves

.

dismissal.

4. By changing the entires of any person including the

petitioner, it leads to civil consequences. Rights of the parties

with regard to the ownership over a property, whether it is

hereditary property or acquired property for which the affected

party, has to approach the competent Civil Court or the statutory

authorities. Instead, what the petitioner had done is that he had

made a representation dated 25.10.2019 to respondents No. 1

and 2 to consider the same. Respondent No. 1 is the Principal

Secretary (Revenue) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh

and respondent No.2 is the District Collector, Kangra. In case the

District Collector, is the statutory authority under the provisions,

a petition/appeal/application should have been made to him for

the necessary changes. In case, if it is a civil dispute, the

petitioner should have approached the Civil Court for necessary

relief. Instead of doing so, he has approached this Court by filing

earlier writ petition and later on it was withdrawn and there was

no direction issued to respondents No. 1 and 2 to implement the

judgment passed on 27.02.2018 in the writ petition No. 265 of

2018.

5. We have heard learned counsel for both the parties.

6. When the civil consequence is the subject matter, it

is always open for the respective party to approach the Civil

.

Court. When it is a statutory right under a particular provision of

law, then the authorities are prescribed under the said act or

rules for the purpose of carrying out necessary changes. By the

facts or pleadings and also the submissions and observations, it

is coming out that respondents No. 1 and 2 to whom the

petitioner had approached for making necessary changes in the

revenue records. Changes in the revenue records lead to change

of ownership and ultimately a civil dispute for which the

petitioner should have approached the Civil Court or if it is

advised to him, he should have approached the statutory

authority. Under these circumstances, we are unable to consider

the case for issuance of necessary orders.

7. With the above observations, the writ petition is

disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.

                                               ( L. Narayana Swamy )
                                                     Chief Justice



    March 06, 2021                                ( Anoop Chitkara )
         (naveen)                                       Judge