Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 16998 (HP)

SURESH KUMAR v. Divisional Commissioner

CWP/12296/2026 · 2026-07-22

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.12296 of 2026 Decided on: 22nd July, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Suresh Kumar …..Petitioner Versus Divisional Commissioner Mandi & others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Parikshit and Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Rajat Choudhry, learned Assistant Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioner’s case is that he is in possession of a civil decree for permanent injunction against some private persons for restraining them from raising any construction or digging or cutting the trees and grass or changing the nature or causing interference over the suit land that is owned by him. The aforesaid decree was granted to him on 10.06.2022. Petitioner instituted an application on 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 22.11.2024 (Annexure P-2) under Section 107 of the H.P. Land Revenue Act for demarcation of his owned land measuring 0-14 bighas comprised in Khasra No.211/138, situated in Village Bhadsin, Pargna Ajmerpur, Sub-Tehsil Bharari, Tehsil Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur as also some adjacent land belonging to the private respondents impleaded therein. The said application was moved before the Collector, Sub-Division Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur. Despite petitioner’s repeated requests, the said application is not being taken to its logical conclusion. Hence, the grievance. 3. Looking to the limited grievance raised by the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.3/competent authority to take the aforesaid application moved by the petitioner under Section 107 of the H.P. Land Revenue Act (Annexure P-2) to its logical conclusion in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within eight weeks from today. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua July 22, 2026 Judge Mukesh