2025:HHC:14377 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA LPA No.232 of 2025 Decided on: 14.05.2025 __________________________________________________________ State of Himachal Pradesh Appellants & Others Versus Rajesh Sharma and another ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the appellants: Mr. Gobind Korla, Additional Advocate General. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice [Oral] CMP(M) No.465 of 2025 Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, delay of 35 days in filing the appeal is condoned. The application stands disposed of. Appeal be registered. LPA No.232 of 2025 The judgment of the learned Single Judge in Civil Writ Petition No.15102 of 2024, titled as Rajesh Sharma versus State of Himachal Pradesh, decided on 11.12.2024, whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner was allowed is sought to be challenged by the State in this Letters Patent 2025:HHC:14377 - 2 - Appeal. Learned Single Judge noticed that the writ petitioner- respondent herein was an auction purchaser as such and in the writ petition only prayed for the removal of the red entries/lien entered in the revenue record so that he could execute the sale deed in favour of the Excise and Taxation Department from the property purchased vide sale certificate dated18.01.2018. 2. The prayer was based on an earlier order passed in CWP No.788 of 2023, titled as State Bank of India versus State of H.P. and others, decided on 11.05.2023, which has further been affirmed in Letters Patent Appeal No.72 of 2024, titled as State of H.P. & Ors. versus State Bank of India and another on 02.04.2024 in favour of the Bank. Resultantly, learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition with direction to official respondents to do the needful in terms of earlier judgment passed by learned Single Judge alongwith connected matters. So far as the writ petition filed by the State Bank of India is concerned, learned Single Judge had relied upon the judgment of Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.2196 of 2012, titled as Punjab National Bank versus Union of India, and others decided on 24.02.2022, (2022) 7 SCC 260. 3. However, the matter having been carried in appeal, before the Coordinate Bench in LPA No.72 of 2024 by 2025:HHC:14377 - 3 - the State was without any success. The Learned Single Judge in present case has also noticed that the writ petitioner was a respondent in the earlier proceedings and therefore, he was seeking consequential relief which was already granted in favour of the Bank who was the beneficiary therein as only on account of removal of the red entries by the State, he would be able to sell the property, as such, or further to alienate and deal with the same. 4. In such circumstances, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned Single Judge who has only repeated the earlier direction passed in first round of litigation initiated by the Bank, which litigation the State has already lost. 5. Accordingly, there is no merit in the present appeal and the same is dismissed. 6. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (G.S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice (Ranjan Sharma) Judge 14th May, 2025 [himani/chiranjeev]