1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3443 of 2023 Decided on: 19.03.2026 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ganga Ram …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P and others .....Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Dr. Rajesh Kumar Parmar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General for respondents No. 1 to 3. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs:- “(i) By way of the writ, order or directions in the nature of writ of Certiorari the impugned orders dated 13.10.2013 passed by ld. District Collector, Solan in Case No.07/13 of 2014 titled as State of H.P. versus Krishan Kumar Rheel & others and order dated 16.11.2019 passed by ld. Divisional Commissioner, Shimla in Appeal No.04/2018 titled as Yashpal versus State of H.P. and others alongwith consequential proceedings (if any) may kindly be quashed and set-aside as same is illegal, irrational and against the provisions & principles of law and justice. (ii) Petitioner prays issuance of writ of prohibition or appropriate writ, against the respondents by restraining them to continue the proceedings against the petitioner, so misuse of the Section 118 of Act can be restrained.” 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 2. Respondents No. 1 to 3 have filed reply on the affidavit of respondent No.2 i.e. Deputy Commissioner, Solan, District Solan, H.P. pleading therein that respondent No.4 has preferred a Revision Petition No. 14/2020 before Financial Commissioner (Appeals), H.P. against the order dated 16.11.2019 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Shimla, which is pending adjudication. 3. During hearing of the present case, learned counsel for the petitioner admitted the above factual position regarding pendency of aforesaid Revision Petition before Financial Commissioner (Appeals), H.P against the order impugned in the present petition. 4. Given the aforesaid, once the impugned order has not yet attained finality and is being adjudicated upon by the statutory authority where the petitioner is admittedly a party respondent, this writ petition filed by the petitioner assailing the same order is not maintainable. There cannot be parallel proceedings for assailing the order which is also being adjudicated upon by the statutory authority and has not even attained finality. Accordingly, present petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua March 19, 2026 Judge yogesh