1 ( 2025:HHC:3555-DB ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Execution Petition No.32 of 2019 Decided on: 27.02.2025 Beas Satluj Link Pariyojna Visthapit Sangh . …..Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others ….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the Petitioner: Mr. Varun Chauhan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Navlesh Verma, Ms. Sharmila Patial, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Raj Negi, Deputy Advocate General, Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge ( Oral ) On 13.12.2024, this court passed the following order:- “Learned Additional Advocate General referring affidavit dated 20.4.2024 filed on 23.4.2024 has submitted that order passed by the Court stands complied with, whereas learned counsel for the petitioner referring copy of jamabandi and extract of Working Plan and para 6 (b) of the aforesaid affidavit, submits that the land so allotted to the petitioner is still in DPF Forest and, therefore, such allotment would be of no use, as the petitioner, as also stated in para 6(b) of the 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes 2 ( 2025:HHC:3555-DB ) affidavit, shall not be able to carry out repair, further construction or any development activity on the land so allotted to the petitioner, unless the land is taken out of the DPF Forest. Though, learned Additional Advocate General, under instructions, submits that petitioner is entitled to enjoy the land as a owner without any restriction of the Forest Conservation Act. However, there is nothing on record to substantiate such plea, therefore, respondents are directed to file fresh comprehensive affidavit clarifying everything in clear terms alongwith supporting documents. Needful be done within four weeks, positively. List on 27th February, 2025.” 2. In compliance to the aforesaid order, the respondents have filed an affidavit which completely dispelled the apprehension of the petitioner that he would not be utilizing the land since it has been classified as forest land. It shall be apt to reproduce paras-2 to 5 of the aforesaid affidavit which read as under:- “2. That, in the above reference, the deponent humbly submits that the oustees of BSL Project have been allotted land in the Changar forest in terms of the letter of the Government dated 30.08.1972 (Copy of the letter alongwith its typed copy is attached as Annexure R-1). The said land measuring 21905 Sq. meters which was allotted to the Oustees has been excluded by the forest department from their Working Plan, management and possession w.e.f. 1972 onwards. The allotted land is no more dealt as forest land/ protected forest in the working plan and compartment history files. Even in revenue records, classification of the allotted land is not mentioned as protected forest (Jungle Mehuja). The copy of the report of the SDM alongwith report of Tehsildar & Patwari alongwith typed copies is attached is Annexure R-II. 3 ( 2025:HHC:3555-DB ) 3. That, the forest department has nothing to do with the land allotted to the Oustees, as it is no more treated as forest land. Legal possession and free use of the allotted land to the Oustees is and shall not be disturbed in any manner. The petitioners are free to carry out repair, further construction or any development activity on the land, so allotted to them. Merely by name of Muhal as DPF does not mean that classification of whole land is DPF. It is clear from the above cited report of SDM that the classification of land allotted to petitioners is not DPF. The area of DPF Changar-A, now treated as protected forest, is 77636 Sq. Meters only, where forest laws are applicable. The rest, which has been allotted, is free from the ambit of the forest land category. The copy of the working plan page alongwith translated copy is attached as Annexure R-III. 4. That, reference of the Forest land in para 6(b) regarding processing of case under Forest Conservation Act is not with respect to the land of petitioners/ oustees i.e. 21904 Sq. mtrs., but the same is with reference to the rest of land that remained after allotment to oustees in Muhal DPF Changar, as the petitioners are seeking to declare that left over land, as non-protected forest. 5. That, the State of H.P. has not mentioned the land of petitioner as Forest land in para 6(b) of affidavit dated 20/04/2024. In para 6 of the said affidavit, the intention of State of H.P is only to bring to the kind attention of this Hon’ble Court the Legal impediment for denotification of Protected Forest, which is not otherwise required also in the present matter. As stated in paras supra, allotted land is no longer a forest land. The legal possession and free use of the allotted land i.e. 21904 Sq. mtrs to the oustees is affirmed and shall not be disturbed in any manner.” 4 ( 2025:HHC:3555-DB ) 3. Now that the respondents have clearly mentioned and undertaken that there is no impediment in the utilization of the land in question for any purpose whatsoever, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition in terms of the undertaking/ affidavit (supra), which shall form part and parcel of this order. Ordered accordingly. Pending application(s) if any, also stands disposed of. (Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge (Sushil Kukreja) Judge 27th February, 2025. (yogesh/pankaj)