1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No. 1270 of 2025 Decided on: 27.02.2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tripta Devi …..Petitioner Versus Kamlesh Kumar and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Sanket Sankhyan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Vishwadeep Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge The petitioner alleges violation of Tripta Devi versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others2 decided as under:- “Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition at hand is that though order dated 27.05.2005 passed by Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Tehsil Office Bilaspur, HP, in Missal No. 59 of 2001 titled State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Paras Ram has attained finality, but till date no steps are being taken by the authorities to implement the same, as a result thereof, above named Paras Ram, besides enjoying the government property, is also contemplating to raise construction on the same. 2. While putting in appearance on behalf of respondents, Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General, submits that though he has every reason to presume and believe that order passed by Assistant Collector, as detailed hereinabove, must have been complied, but if not, same shall be complied with expeditiously subject to condition that same is not stayed or set aside by the higher Court. 3. Consequently, in view of the fair stand adopted by learned Additional Advocate General, present petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2CWP No.16039/2024, decided on 24.12.2024. 2 respondents to ensure compliance of order dated 27.05.2005 (Annexure P-1) expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks, if not already stayed or set aside by the higher Court. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.” 2. Respondents have filed the compliance affidavit stating therein that in the process of implementing Tripta Devi,2 respondents were apprised of the fact that order dated 27.05.2025 passed by A.C. 2nd Grade, Tehsil Office, Bilaspur, H.P. which was to be implemented as per Tripta Devi,2 was actually assailed in CMP(M) No.2088/2025, Ved Parkash versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others wherein following order was passed on 03.12.2025:- “Notice. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4/State. He prays for and is granted four weeks’ time to file reply. Separate notice to respondent No.5 be also issued, on taking steps within a period of two days, returnable within four weeks. Learned Additional Advocate General fairly undertakes before this Court that till the next date of hearing, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner pursuant to Annexure P-9. List on 05.01.2026.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner admits that in view of order dated 03.12.2025 passed in CMP(M) No.2088/2025; the order dated 27.05.2025 has come under cloud and consequently, Tripta Devi2 cannot be implemented in letter & spirit at this stage. Hence, he submits that present proceedings though be closed at this 3 stage but liberty be reserved to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy at an appropriate stage in case necessity so arises in future. 4. Taking note of above, present proceedings are closed with liberty reserved to the petitioner as prayed for. Notice issued to respondents are discharged. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua February 27, 2026 Judge yogesh