2025:HHC:44108 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 19143 of 2025 Decided on: 17.12.2025 Kahan Singh and others … Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 _____________________________________________________ For the petitioners : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Suri, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Assistant AG for respondents-State. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioners have inter alia prayed for the following reliefs:- “(i) That the impugned order dated 04-06-2025 passed by the Ld. Financial Commissioner (Appeals) H.P. Shimla, impugned order dated 21-02-2025 passed by the Ld. Divisional Commissioner Mandi. Division Mandi, H.P. and order dated 23- 01-2017 passed by the Learned Sub-Divisional Collector, Jogindernagar, may kindly be quashed and set-aside. ii) That the respondent authorities may kindly be directed to give effect to the final partition order and ensure peaceful possession to the petitioners of their lawfully allotted shares.” 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:44108 2. Having heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and having perused the orders under challenge, this court is of the considered view that in the peculiar facts of this case, it would not be in the interest of justice to issue notice in the petition as the same will amount to further linger on the already delayed partition proceedings. In fact, the grievance of the petitioners herein is also that the partition proceedings have been lingering on for no reason whatsoever for so many years. 3. Record also demonstrates that in terms of order dated 30.01.2017, the Sub Divisional Collector ordered the Assistant Collector 1st Grade to complete the partition proceedings within a fixed time. While dealing with the matter on appellate side, learned Divisional Commissioner, Mandi, in terms of order dated 21.02.2025 (Annexure P-9), observed that this order does not prejudice anyone for the reason that even if the case is decided afresh, the same has to be on the basis of mode of partition already in existence because Sub Divisional Collector has not passed any order to modify the mode of partition. These findings returned by learned Divisional Commissioner have been upheld in appeal by learned Financial Commissioner in terms of the impugned order dated 04.06.2025 (Annexure P-10). 3 2025:HHC:44108 4. In the light of the fact that the present petitioners are not aggrieved by the mode of partition and further the Sub Divisional Collector has ordered the authority to decide the partition proceedings afresh in terms of the already agreed mode of partition, therefore, without interfering with the orders under challenge, this petition, as prayed for, is disposed of with direction that now let the needful be done by the Authority concerned on or before 31.01.2026, in accordance with law. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge December 17, 2025 (narender)