2025:HHC:22863 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 11319 of 2025 Decided on: 16.07.2025 Chandu … Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 _____________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. Gurinder Singh Parmar, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Pushpender Jaswal, Additional Advocate General for respondents No. 1 and 2. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) Notice confined to respondents No. 1 and 2. Mr. Pushpender Jaswal, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of said respondents. 2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- “It is, therefore respectfully prayed that the petition may kindly be allowed and impugned order dated 15.01.2025 be set aside and action be taken against the encroachment committed by the respondents No. 3 and 4 or respondent No. 2 be directed to proceed against the respondent No. 3 and 4 as per law.” 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:22863 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that proceedings which were initiated against the private respondents under Section 163 of the H.P. Land Revenue Act, at the behest of the petitioner, have been closed unceremoniously on the pretext of wrong holding out by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade vide order dated 15.01.2025. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that as the petitioner has no right to assail said order, it is in these circumstances that the petitioner has approached this Court. 4. This Court is of the considered view that as it was the petitioner, who initiated the process which culminated into initiation of proceedings under Section 163 of the H.P. Land Revenue Act against the private respondents, he can always approach the higher authorities, informing them about the order passed by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade. Accordingly, these proceedings are closed with the direction that in case any petition is preferred by the petitioner against order dated 15.01.2025 before the higher authorities, the same shall be decided, on merit, in accordance with law, after hearing all the stakeholders. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge July 16, 2025 (narender)