The court emphasized that extension of time for land demarcation and tree felling must be granted based on verified adverse conditions, rejecting previous unjustified grounds of refusal.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Sharma, J.

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated 4.10.2022 (Annexure P-25), whereby representation having been filed by the petitioner in terms of judgment dated 17.8.2022 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 4181 of 2020, titled M/s Vidhimata Wood Pvt. Limited v. State of Himachal Pradesh and others (Annexure P-22), praying therein for extension of time under Clause 8 of Order dated 10.9.2002, came to be rejected, the petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following main relief(s):

“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed and an appropriate writ, order or direction may be issued thereby quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 04.10.2022 (Annexure P-25) and granting the extension of time for demarcation of land, enumeration, marking and felling of trees from Kandlidhar in Khasra No. 10/7/2 in Trehta Beat, Holi Block Bharmour Division, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, beyond the prescribed year of felling, in terms of clause 8 of Order No. FFE-B-A(3)4/99 dated 10.9.2002 and amendments dated 11.11.2003 and 24.9.2003, and while doing so, the period during which the case of the petitioner for extension of time remained pending with the respondents and in litigation(s) due to illegal rejection by the respondents, may kindly be excluded for granting extension of time for demarcation, enumeration, marking and felling of trees from area.

The respondents may be further directed to complete the entire process of demarcation of land, enumeration and marking of trees in a time bound period.”

2. For having a bird’s eye view of the matter, certain facts, which may be relevant for the adjudication of the case at hand are that though private land measuring 8162 Bighas comprised in Khasra No. 10/7/2 and 9/7/2/1 situated at Mauza Dhar Dhrabaton, Pargana Trehta, Sub Tehsil Holi, Tehsil Bharmour, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh (popularly known as “Kandli Dhar”) was granted to the forefathers of land owners by way of Inaam/grant by late Raja Sahib Shri Siri Singh Ji of Chamba on 26th Har Samwat 30 but during settlement operations in Chamba, around the year 1955, land in question wrongly came to be recorded in revenue records in the ownership of Government of Himachal Pradesh. Land owners filed an application for correction of records, but the same was rejected. Subsequently, the Financial Commissioner, in an appeal filed by the land owners, directed them to get their ownership established before a civil court. Land owners then filed Civil Suit No. 136/306 of 1961/63 before learned Senior Sub Judge, Chamba, who vide judgment and decree dated 22.4.1965 (Annexure P-3) declared the landowners, who were plaintiffs therein, to be owner-in-possession of the land situate in Kandli Dhar measuring 8956 Bigha as per Map, which formed part of the decree, situate in Hadbast No. 191, Mauza Dhar Dhrabton, Sub Tehsil Bharmour and the defendants, Union of India, Himachal Pradesh Administration and Collector, Chamba, who were defendants therein, were restrained from interfering in their rights as owners. Though the judgment and decree passed by Senior Sub Judge, Chamba was laid challenge upto Hon'ble Apex Court, but the same remained intact (Annexures P-4 to P-6).

3. Pursuant to judgment and decree passed by civil court, revenue record with regard to ownership and possessory rights of land owners was corrected. Jamabandi for the years 1985-86 (Annexure P-7) clearly reveals that the land owners were en