Himachal Pradesh High Court
Decided On : 01.07.2025 vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 1 July, 2025
Author: Ajay Mohan Goel
Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel
2025:HHC:20746
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT
SHIMLA
CWP No. 7515 of 2025
Decided on : 01.07.2025
Rajiv Bakshi.
.
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and others.
...Respondents
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner : Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, Advocate
(through V.C.), with Mr. Gurinder
r Singh Parmar, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Rahul Thakur, Deputy
Advocate General, for
respondents No.1 to 3.
Mr. Suneet Goel, Senior Advocate,
with Mr. Aman Hansretta,
Advocate, for respondent No.4.
Mr. Arjun Lall, Advocate, for
respondent No.5.
Mr. Deven Krishan Khanna,
Advocate, for respondent No.16.
M/s Karun Negi and Somesh
Sharma, Advocates, for
respondents No.45 & 46.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)
By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter
1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2025:HHC:20746
alia, prayed for the following relief:-
"That the operation and implementation of
impugned order dated 25.04.2025 passed by learned Sub-
.
Divisional Collector, Kasauli be stayed till the filing and
adjudication of revision petition before learned Financial
Commissioner of Himachal Pradesh and further staying
and setting aside proceeding of warrant of possession
scheduled for 05.05.2025 in the best interest of justice so
that the petitioner be not disposed from his ancestral land."
2. When this case was listed on 05.05.2025, the
following order was passed:-
Notice. Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, learned Advocate
General, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to
3-State. Issue notice to the private respondents, returnable
for 28.06.2025, on steps for service being taken within one
week. Reply by respondents No.1 to 3 be filed in the
meanwhile.
Notice in above terms. Learned counsel for the
applicant/petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to
the documents appended with the petition. He submits that
an instrument of partition was prepared in terms of
Annexure P-1. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner had
2025:HHC:20746
preferred an appeal in terms of Annexure P-2 and vide
Annexure P-3, dated 25.04.2025, the appeal of the
petitioner has been dismissed. Learned counsel by
.
referring to the order dated 25.04.2025, submitted that
copy of the same was made available to the petitioner only
on 02.05.2025 and though, it was mentioned in the order
that detailed order shall be issued separately, but till date
the detailed order, in terms whereof, the appeal of the
petitioner has been rejected, has not seen the light of the
day. Learned counsel submitted that in the absence of the
grounds of rejection being available with the petitioner, he
is not in a position to avail his further statutory remedies,
because there is nothing with him as of today so as to
assail by way of an appeal. Learned counsel further
submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court in umpteen number
of judgments has been pleased to hold that any order
including orders that may be administrative or Quassi
Judicial, if the same have any civil consequence as far as
a person is concerned, then reasoning is the soul of the
order and in the absence of any reasoning being out in
public till date, the petitioner has no remedy, but to invoke
the extra writ jurisdiction of this Court in the interregnum,
so that his interest can be protected. Accordingly, learned
counsel submitted that the petitioner be protected in the
2025:HHC:20746
interregnum as he is facing a warrant of possession which
has again been issued in a hot haste manner on
01.05.2025 itself for 05.05.2025, which was served upon
.
the petitioner only on 02.05.2025.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, as
this Court is of the considered view that there is a prima
facie case made out by the petitioner, because obviously
in the absence of the detailed order of rejection of appeal
being with the petitioner, he is not in a position to assail
prompted the
the same. Further, this Court fails to understand that till the
time the detailed order is not out, what is the hot haste that
Revenue Officer to issue order of
attachment in terms of Annexure P-2. Therefore, till further
orders, Annexure P-4, dated 01.05.2025 is hereby stayed
and it is ordered that the warrant of attachment shall not
be executed without the leave of the Court. Learned
Additional Advocate General has noted down the gist of
the order passed by the Court today and he assured the
Court that the same will be communicated to the Revenue
Authorities forthwith."
3. Thereafter, when the matter was taken up by the
Court on 28.06.2025, the following order was passed:-
"Mr. Aman Hansretta, Mr. Deven Khanna and Mr.
Karun Negi, learned counsel, have put in appearance on
2025:HHC:20746
behalf of respondents No.4 and 16 and 45, 46,
respectively. On the instructions of Mr. Aman Hansretta,
learned counsel, Mr. Suneet Goel, learned Senior
.
Counsel, has also put in appearance on behalf of
respondent No.4.
Learned Senior Counsel along-with other learned
counsel, appearing for the respondents, submit that as the
primary grievance of the petitioner was that the certified
copy of the order passed in the Appeal, was not made
available to him, yet coercive actions were being taken
against the petitioner, now, in the light of the fact that the
petitioner is in possession of the certified copy thereof and
he has already preferred a Revision Petition before the
learned Financial Commissioner, this petition has lost its
efficacy.
List on 01.07.2025, on which date the contention of
the respondents shall be considered."
4. Today, I have heard learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as learned Deputy Advocate General and
learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.4 and learned
counsel for the remaining respondents.
5. The Court stands apprised that the revision that has
been preferred by the petitioner against the order passed by
2025:HHC:20746
the Collector, Sub-Division Kasauli, is listed before the learned
Divisional Authority on 15.07.2025 and certified copy of the
order passed by the Collector is also on record before the said
.
Authority.
6. In the light of this fact and taking into consideration
the situation faced with which the petitioner had approached
this Court, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction that
the interim protection that has been granted by the Court to the
petitioner shall continue up to 15.07.2025 or such date, by
which the interim application filed by the petitioner is decided by
the learned Financial Commissioner on merit.
7. It is clarified that all endeavour shall be made by the
learned Financial Commissioner to decide both the revision
petition as well as the application filed praying for interim relief,
as expeditiously as possible, of course in accordance with law,
without being influenced by any observation made by this Court
in either of the orders passed by it.
9. With these observations, the petition is disposed of.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand
disposed of accordingly.
2025:HHC:20746
10. At this stage, Mr. Arjun Lall, learned counsel
appearing for respondent No.5 submits that though he had
assisted the Court on the last date of hearing, yet inadvertently
.
his presence has not been marked in the order. Registry is
directed to reflect the presence of Mr. Arjun Lall, learned
counsel for respondent No.5 in order dated 28.06.2025 and
after carrying out the necessary correction, a fresh order be
uploaded on the website.
(Ajay Mohan Goel)
Judge
July 01, 2025
(Shivank Thakur)
