Jagdish Jaswal vs State Of H.P. And Another

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

Petitioner seeks direction to the respondents for closure of the proceedings under Section 118 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1972, pending against him before respondent No.2-the District Collector, Solan.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file.

The case:-

3(i). Proceedings under Section 118 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1972 (in short ‘the Act’) were initiated against the petitioner for allegedly violating the provisions of the Act. These proceedings had been initiated on the report of the Superintendent of Police, District Solan that the petitioner had purchased certain specific parcels of land in Tehsil Kandaghat, District Solan in violation of the provisions of the Act, as entire consideration amount towards sale deeds in question had been paid by the Non-Himachali/Non-Agriculturist of Himachal Pradesh, namely G.R. Builders. That the land in question had been purchased under ‘Benami Transactions’.

3(ii). The District Collector, Solan issued a show cause notice to the petitioner. The District Collector, Solan finally held that the petitioner had violated Section 118 of the Act and accordingly on 20.01.2017, ordered vestment of the land in question with the State Government free from all encumbrances. The appeal preferred by the petitioner and G.R. Builders against the above order was decided by the Divisional Commissioner on 29.12.2017, whereby the order passed by the District Collector, Solan was set aside and the case was remanded to the District Collector for fresh decision after examining the facts in light of the observations made in order dated 29.12.2017.

3(iii). Feeling aggrieved, State of Himachal Pradesh preferred revision petition before the Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Himachal Pradesh. The revision petition was dismissed on 20.11.2019. The aforesaid orders were further assailed by the State of Himachal Pradesh in State Versus Sh. Jagdish Jaswal and Anr.2. The writ petition was dismissed on 02.08.2023. The order passed by the Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Himachal Pradesh on 20.11.2019 as also the order dated 29.12.2017 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Shimla were affirmed. Parties to the lis were directed to remain present before the District Collector, Solan on 05.09.2023.

3(iv). Petitioner’s grievance as projected by his learned counsel is that no further effective hearings have taken place after remand of the case before the District Collector, Solan. The proceedings are still pending before the said authority without there being any decision of the lis. In the aforesaid background, petitioner has prayed for direction to the respondents to close the proceedings, being non-est in the eyes of law, by placing reliance upon Section 118(3)(A) of the Act.

3(v). Respondents have filed reply, pleading therein that one Sh. Bhagwan Swaroop was required to be examined in the matter. That the respondents were facing difficulty in securing presence of aforesaid Sh. Bhagwan Swaroop, who is a material witness; It is for this principal reason that the case could not be concluded; The summons issued to him on different dates could not be executed as his whereabouts were repeatedly being reported to be incorrect or unavailable by the revenue field staff as also by the local Police; That such reports had been placed on record of the case on different dates, whereafter, fresh directions were issued from time to time to trace him including through the Superintendent of Police, Solan and the District Revenue Officer. Finally, as a result of continued steps taken for service of the material witness- Sh. Bhagwan Swaroop, he appeared before the concerned authority on 04.12.2025 in obedience to the summons issued to him. His presence was duly recorded, however, his evidence could not be recorded in view of the interim order passed in this writ petition on 30.10.2025, staying further proceedings against the petitioner under Section 118 of the Act, which was produced by the counsel for the present petitioner (respondent No.1 therein) before the concerned authority.

Learned Assistant Advocate General submitted that the respondents are ready and willing to decide the proceedings pending against the petitioner expeditiously since the material witness-Sh. Bhagwan Swaroop has now appeared before the concerned authority and his whereabouts are available with the respondents.

In view of above and in the interest of justice, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2/competent authority to decide the proceedings under Section 118 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1972 pending before it, as expeditiously as possible, but in any case, not later than six months from today. Interim order dated 30.10.2025 is hereby vacated. All the parties including the contesting respondent (State) shall render due co-operation to the competent authority and will not take unnecessary adjournment(s).

The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.