IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 7090 of 2023 Decided on: 04.12.2023 Shashi Gupta .…Petitioner.

Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others o …Respondents.

Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹ Yes.

For the petitioner: Petitioner is present in person.

For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with M/s oRupinder Singh and Pushpender Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, M/s Rohit Sharma Cand Sumit Sharma, Deputy Advocate Generals and Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Law Officer.

Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral):

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

“(i) For directing the respondents to issue sale certificate in respect of residential property, comprising in Khasra Nos. 1994/713, 2006/682, 2011/684, 685 and 2014/286, Khatouni No. 606/588, Khewat No. 365/356, situated in Mauza Thoddo, Tehsil Solan, H.P., which is purchased by the petitioner in pursuance to sale conducted by respondens No. 2 and 3 pursuant to Courts order (certificate without any permission U/S.

118).

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

(ii) To direct the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to enter the name of the petitioner as owner in the revenue records on the basis of sale as sale has already been finalized and to direct them to register the Sales Certificate without insisting for affixation of stamp duty.

(iii) That directing the respfondents to exempt the petitioner from applicability of Section 118 for the purpose of directly selling t he residential property with land in question, in favour of third parties/Himachalis OR in the alternative to above:

(a) For directing the respondents to register the sale doeed of the property mentioned in relief clause No. (i) in favour of petitioner, in a time bound schedule (in minimum time) without insisting upon the procedure u nder Section 118 of the HP Tenancy and Land Reforms Act.

(b) That directing the respondents to exempt the petitioner from applicability of Section 118 for the purpose of directly selling the residential property and land in question, in favour of third parties/Himachalis.”

2. The case of the petitioner is that she purchased a residential property for an amount of Rs.75,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Lac Only), measuring 260 sq. metres, situated in Mauza Thoddo, Tehsil and District Solan, H.P. in a public auction as per order passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ludhiana. The auction was conducted by respondent No. 3 under Section 421 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the report was duly signed by the then Deputy Commissioner, Solan and the same was sent to learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ludhiana. The entire sale amount wasP deposited by the petitioner in the Court on 11^th July, 2023. Thereafter, the Court called upon respondent No. 2 to issue a Sale Certificate in favour of the petitioner in terms of order dated 11.07.2023 (Annexure P-1). The petitioner visited the concerned authorioties on several occasions for issuance of Sale Certificate, but the s ame is not being issued, on the pretext that as the petitioner is a non-agriculturist and as she has not obtained permission to purchase the property in Himachal under Section 118 of the H.P. Tenoancy and Land Reforms Act, therefore, the Sale Certificate coulCd not be issued to her.

3. The contention of the petitioner is that the act of the respondents of denying Sale Certificate to her is bad in law, for the reason that rigours of Section 118 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and iLand Reforms Act, 1972 are not attracted in the facts of the case and as she has purchased the property pursuant to a Court auction order and pursuant to an auction conducted by the Court, no permission is required under the provisions of Section 118 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1972. It is further the case of the petitioner that this issue is no more res integra and this Court in CWP