IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8426 of 2026 Decided on: 15th July, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Abhi Singh Jamwal …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Sambhav Bhasin, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 6. Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate, for respondent No.7. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioner has prayed for issuance of writ of mandamus to respondent No.6 to incorporate, restore & give effect to the mutation and corresponding revenue entries in favour of the petitioner with respect to the land comprised in Old Khasra No.155/1, new Khasra No.397/1, measuring 4 Kanals & 18 Marlas, situated at Mohal Sidhpur, Mouza Khanyara, Tehsil Dharamshala, District 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 Kangra in the latest jamabandi and all connected revenue records. 2. Pursuant to the order passed in this writ petition on 25.05.2026, learned Deputy Advocate General had placed on record detailed instructions dated 04.06.2026 from the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), Dharamshala, District Kangra, conveying that no revenue record is there in the office of the concerned revenue department supporting the case of the petitioner, the existence of Khasra No.397/1 or evidencing any allotment, transfer or conferment of rights in respect thereof. The office instructions are also accompanied with a comprehensive factual report dated 03.06.2026 from the office of the Tehsildar Dharamshala, District Kangra. 3. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in view of the stand taken by the respondents, as conveyed in the office instructions, the petitioner would be required to seek appropriate remedy in accordance with law for the redressal of his grievances, however, there is no formal order passed by the respondents on the representation of the petitioner, therefore, the respondents be directed to decide the case of 3 the petitioner to enable him to take appropriate recourse in law. 4. Taking note of above, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.5/competent authority to pass an order deciding the case/representation of the petitioner in accordance with law within two weeks from today. It shall be open for the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy in accordance with law for the redressal of his grievances based upon the order to be passed by respondent No.5. With these observations, the writ petition to stand disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua July 15, 2026 Judge Mukesh