IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA
JAGDISH CHAND AND ANOTHER – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS – Respondent
CWP/7043/2026
##PAGE1##
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
CWP No.7043 of 2026
Decided on: 19.05.2026
_________________________________________________________________
Jagdish Chand and Anr ....Petitioners
Versus
State of H.P. & Ors …Respondents
_________________________________________________________________
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua
1 Whether approved for reportting?
___________________________r______________________________________
For the petitioners: Mr. Ashwani Kaundal, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General
with Mr. Y.P.S.Dhaulta, Additional
Advocate General for respondent
No.1.
Nemo for respondents No.2 to 8
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Petitioner feels aggrieved against order dated
26.02.2024, passed by the Divisional Commissioner Mandi
[exercising powers of Financial Commissioner, (Appeals)
Himachal Pradesh], whereby revision petition preferred by the
petitioners was dismissed.
2. Heard and considered the case file.
1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes
::: Downloaded on - 20/05/2026 20:45:41 :::CIS
##PAGE2##- 2 -
3. From the case file, it appears that:- It was during
the years 2003-04 that respondent No.2 moved an application
under Section 123 of the Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue
Act, 1954 (the Act in short) for partition of lanHd held by him
jointly with other co-owners, including the present
petitioners. The Assistant Collector First Grade, Nadaun,
District Hamirpur, processed the application and vide order
dated 23.02.2005, finalized the partition. Feeling aggrieved
against order dated 23.02.2005, petitioners preferred appeal
before the Sub-Divisional Collector, Nadaun, District
Hamirpur. The appeal was dismissed on 24.12.2008.
Petitioners carried the matter further in Revision Petition filed
undher Section 17 of the Act before the Divisional
gCommissioner, Mandi [exercising powers of Financial
Commissioner (Appeals) Himachal Pradesh]. The said
Revision Petition was also dismissed on 26.02.2024.
More than a year after the dismissal of the
aforesaid Revision Petition, petitioners instituted this writ
petition seeking to quash and set aside order dated
26.02.2024. Objections pointed out by the Registry in the
writ petition were removed after a delay of about 270 days.
::: Downloaded on - 20/05/2026 20:45:41 :::CIS
##PAGE3##- 3 -
The substantive relief prayed for in the writ petition reads as
under:-
“(i) That the impugned order dated 26.02.2024
(Annexure P-5) may kindly be quashed and further
directed the learned Assistant Collector 1st Class
to partition the land as per posse ssion and share of
the parties.”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that
a path had been provided otver Khasra No. 99 subject matter
of partition proceedings, but width of the path provided to the
petitioners in the aforesaid khasra number was not adequate.
For this reason, orders passed by the Authorities below are
required to be set aside and the matter remanded to the
Assistant Collector First Grade, Nadaun District Hamirpur,
for carrying out fresh partition proceedings.
5. Perusal of order dated 23.02.2005 passed by the
Assistant Collector First Grade, Nadaun District Hamirpur,
finalizing the partition proceedings takes note of petitioners’
prayer for giving them path from Khasra No. 99 and
accordingly path has been carved out from Khasra No. 99.
Learned counsel for the petitioners could not point out any
document on the case file suggesting that petitioners ever
::: Downloaded on - 20/05/2026 20:45:41 :::CIS
##PAGE4##- 4 -
objected either before the Sub Divisional Collector, Nadaun or
before the Divisional Commissioner, Mandi about
inadequacy/insufficiency of the width of path carved out in
Khasra No.99. The order passed by the HSub-Divisional,
Collector, Nadaun, as also by the Divisional Commissioner,
Mandi takes note of the fact that petitioner No.1 had himself
given a statement on 29.01.2005 to the effect that partition
carried out on the spot was acceptable to him. That being
the admitted position and there being no document
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.