Hachu Ram & Another vs State Of H.P. & Others

Sureshwar Thakur, J

Despite service being caused upon respondent No. 5, the latter is neither present in person, nor has engaged any counsel, for, representing his cause, in the extant lis, hence, directed to be proceeded ex parte.

Upon civil writ petition No. 767 of 2019, the Principal Division Bench of this Court, upon, motion, being made, before this Court, by one Sh. Kashmir Singh, and, wherein respondent No. 4, herein one Baldev Singh, become arrayed, as, respondent No. 5, had made a direction, that the latter be forthwith put in possession, of, the property in question. Since the afore order remained uncomplied with, by, the respondents-State, thereupon, the afore co-respondent No. 5, in the earlier writ petition, bearing CWP No. 767 of 2019, instituted a contempt petition, bearing COPC No. 114 of 2020, and, a Coordinate Bench of this Court, had directed that orders, rendered on CWP No. 767 of 2019, be positively complied with within two weeks. Upon failure of the respondents, to, mete compliance therewith, a direction, was made qua hence appropriate action, in accordance with law, being initiated against the errant respondent(s). Consequently, through Annexure P-7, an endeavor was made, by the Naib Tehsildar, Padhar, to, mete compliance(s), vis-à-vis, order passed on 07.01.2020, upon, CWP No. 767 of 2019, and also, vis-à-vis, the afore order, pronounced subsequently, on 19.08.2020, upon, COPC No. 114 of 2020. However, the writ petitioner(s) projected, vis-à-vis, his/them being tenant(s) thereon(s), and, hence resisted and obstructed, the, delivery of apposite possession, to, one Sh. Baldev Singh, who was declared a successful auction bidder/purchaser.

Even though, the writ petitioners were not arrayed as party(ies) in the earlier writ petition, however, the afore order made, on 07.01.2020, by Principal Division Bench of this Court, upon, CWP No. 767 of 2019, and also the order made, by, a, Coordinate Bench of this Court, upon, COPC No. 114 of 2020, on 19.08.2020, completely ousts the writ petitioner(s), to, make the afore plea, before the writ Court. The only remedy available to the writ petitioner, is, to cast a challenge, upon, the afore orders, upon, the afore grounds, inasmuch as, their non-impleadment, by the writ petitioner, in the earlier proceedings, being a sequel of the writ petitioner, in the earlier writ petition, and also one Sh. Baldev Singh arrayed as co-respondent No. 4, in the extant writ petition and co-respondent No. 5, in the earlier writ petition, both obtaining the afore orders, through theirs earlier proactively practicing suggestio falsi and suppressio veri.

Consequently, there is no merit in the extant writ petition and respondent No. 3, is, directed to forthwith put co-respondent No. 4, in possession of the writ property. All pending applications are disposed of.