Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Satpal Saini vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 23 September, 2016

Bench: Rajiv Sharma, Sureshwar Thakur

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.

                                              CWP No. 3572/2014
                                Decided on: September 23, 2016
    _______________________________________________________________




                                                                                      .
    Satpal Saini                                     ...... Petitioner





                                Versus
    State of Himachal Pradesh and others         ........Respondents
    _______________________________________________________________





    Coram:
    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge
    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge




                                                        of
    Whether approved for reporting? 1 yes.
    _______________________________________________________________
    For the petitioner      :    Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate.

    For the respondents     rt   Mr.       :
                                        M.A.    Khan,    Additional
                                 Advocate General.
    _______________________________________________________________
    Per Rajiv Sharma, Judge:

In sequel to directions issued on 15.7.2016, respondent No.1 has filed his supplementary affidavit. According to the averments made in the affidavit, petitioner, who is husband of Ram Dulari (who was an agriculturist), qualifies to be an agriculturist himself keeping in view the Notification dated 20.5.2016.

2. There is perpetual litigation under Section 118 of the HP Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1972. A large population of non-agriculturist Himachalis has been deprived of their right to purchase property in the State without the permission of the State Government though they are residing in the State of Himachal Pradesh for decades together. There is a sense of alienation amongst the non-agriculturist Himachalis. They are integral part 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:17:48 :::HCHP 2

of the State of Himachal Pradesh and have a sense of belonging to the State.

3. Accordingly, impugned annexure P-9 dated 23.4.2014 .

is quashed and set aside. Respondents are directed to attest the mutation within a period of eight weeks from today by treating the petitioner to be an agriculturist.

4. However, before parting with the judgment, this Court of deems it fit and proper to direct the State Government to make suitable amendments to Section 118 of the HP Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1972 read with HP Tenancy and Land Reforms Rules, rt 1975 in order to facilitate to purchase any land (agricultural and non-agricultural) in the State of Himachal Pradesh by the non-

agriculturist Himachalis residing in the State for decades together prior to the date of commencement of the HP Tenancy and Land Reforms Act,1972, within a period of ninety days from today.

5. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.

(Rajiv Sharma) Judge (Sureshwar Thakur) Judge September 23, 2016 (vikrant) ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:17:48 :::HCHP