( 2025:HHC:21075 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CMPMO No. 352 of 2025. Decided on : 3 rd July, 2025. Bharti Sood & Anr. ...Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. R.L. Sood, Senior Advocate with Ms. Sanjivni Sood, Advocate and Mr. Aakash Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Gautam Sood, Dy. A.G., for the respondent-State. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral). The instant petition has been filed for following relief:- “a. Allow the present petition and may further be pleased to quash and set aside the partition proceedings, initiated by respondent No.2, in respect of land bearing Khata Khatauni No.2/2 and 3 Kita 11 measuring 7158-39 sq. meters situate in Mauza Up Mohal Kelston, Tehsil Shimla (Urban) and District Shimla, 171001, H.P.” 2. It is revealed from the record that the Assistant Collector has initiated the proceedings for partition of land under the Land Revenue Act and the petitioner has been 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 ( 2025:HHC:21075 ) issued a notice, copy of which finds place at page 19 of the paper book. 3. Primary contention raised in the instant petition is that the land with respect to which the partition proceedings have been initiated is not amenable to partition under the H.P. Land Revenue Act being land falling within the territorial limits of Municipal Corporation, Shimla and also not being assessed to land revenue and further not being the agricultural land. 4. Noticeably, after the receipt of notice, the petitioner has issued a legal notice to the Assistant Collector raising her objection as to the jurisdiction of the Assistant Collector to deal with the case. It is on such basis that the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 5. Petitioner, without raising objection as to the jurisdiction of Assistant Collector before the said authority, who exercises quasi judicial functions under the H.P. Land Revenue Act, cannot approach this Court directly. 6. At this stage, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to approach the Assistant Collector concerned with her objection as to the jurisdiction of said authority to deal with 3 ( 2025:HHC:21075 ) the matter and to direct the Assistant Collector to decide the issue in jurisdiction in the first instance. 7. Prayer being innocuous is allowed. Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of with permission and liberty to the petitioner to approach the Assistant Collector concerned with her objection as to the jurisdiction. On being so approached, the Assistant Collector shall decide the issue of jurisdiction in the first instance. In case, the petitioner still remains aggrieved, she will be at liberty to assail the order of Assistant Collector by seeking remedy as available to her under law. In the event of need arising to assail the order of Assistant Collector, she will be afforded two week’s time to seek appropriate remedy and till then no further orders shall be passed in the partition proceedings. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Satyen Vaidya) Judge 3rd July, 2025. (jai)