2025:HHC:1067 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.355 of 2025 Date of Decision: 6.1.2025 _____________________________________________________________ Yadvinder Kaushal ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.c. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for the State. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Surinder Saklani, learned counsel for the petitioner is that despite there being direction issued by the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil) Fatehpur, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, no steps are being taken by Naib Tehsildar (Rey), District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh for demarcation of the land, as a result thereof, petitioner herein is unable to start process for demarcation, enumeration and felling of khair trees pursuant to prayer made by him for felling of tress under Ten Year Felling Program (TYFP). 2025:HHC:1067 - 2 - 2. While referring to communication dated 18.11.2024 issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Nurpur, Forest Division Nurpur addressed to Sub Divisional Officer Fatehpur, Mr. Saklani, states that though forest authorities have already requested the revenue authorities for demarcation of the land, but yet steps are not being taken by Revenue department, as a result thereof, petitioner herein is running out of time because in any eventuality, process, if any, is to be completed on or before 31.3.2025. He states that Sub Divisional Officer Fatehpur, pursuant to request made by him, Divisional Forest Officer Nurpur has already directed the Naib Tehsildar (Rey) District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, to demarcate the land, but, on one pretext or the other matter, is being delayed. 3. While putting in appearance on behalf of the respondents, Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General invited attention of this Court to the order dated 10.12.2024, (Annexure P-4), to demonstrate that on account of certain clarification, needful could not be done on the spot by the Naib Tehsildar concerned. He states that though steps already stand initiated for demarcation but same could not be conducted on the spot for want of certain clarifications. 4. Having perused aforesaid communication, this Court finds that certain clarification has been sought by the Kanungo with respect to entry of “Khudro Drakhtan Malkiyat Sarkar”. Though aforesaid authority before conducting demarcation, if any, pursuant to order 2025:HHC:1067 - 3 - passed by the Sub Divisional Officer is well within its right to satisfy itself with regard to possession and ownership of the land in question, but certainly needful is required to be done at the earliest so that rightful claim, if any, of the petitioner is not defeated. 5. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to ensure that demarcation of the land and marking trees pursuant to requests made by the Divisional Forest Officer, Nurpur, dated 18.11.2024 and 19.12.2024 is done expeditiously, preferably on or before 31.1.2025. Needless to say, authorities concerned while doing the needful shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other stake holders. Pending applications also stand disposed of. January 6, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), manjit Judge