IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.13496 of 2026 Decided on: 7th August, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bhan Chand …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Archna Dutt, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. Seema Sharma, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Ms. Seema Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioner seeks direction to the respondents for attestation of mutation pertaining to the nautor land sanctioned in his favour vide office letter dated 27.01.2005 (Annexure P-1). The grievance of the petitioner, as projected by his learned counsel, is that the land mentioned in the sanction order dated 27.01.2005 (Annexure P-1) was 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 allotted to the petitioner, however, till date the attestation of mutation of the aforesaid allotted land has not been made in petitioner’s favour. Petitioner moved an application (Annexure P-2) in this regard to respondent No.2-the Deputy Commissioner, District Chamba, which was forwarded by respondent No.4 to respondent No.3 with request to conduct an inquiry into the matter. Despite repeated reminders to the competent authority, the same has not been taken to its logical conclusion. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied in case respondent No.3/competent authority is directed to take appropriate call on the application moved by the petitioner seeking attestation of mutation consequent upon nautor sanction dated 27.01.2005 within a fixed time schedule. Learned Deputy Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.3/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid application/representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-2) and take appropriate call in the matter in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from 3 today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua August 07, 2026 Judge Mukesh