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 1, Cited by 0]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Sunita Devi vs State Of H.P. Through on 24 August, 2022

Bench: Sabina, Sushil Kukreja

                              1




    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
               ON THE 24th DAY OF AUGUST, 2022
                          BEFORE




                                                           .
                HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SABINA,





                              &
           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUSHIL KUKREJA





                CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5177 of 2022

         Between:-





         SUNITA DEVI, WIFE OF
         SH. JIA LAL (PRESENTLY)
         RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BAHLI,
         TEHSIL KUMARSAIN,
         DISTRICT SHIMLA-172030 (H.P.).               ....PETITIONER


         (MR. VIPINDER ROACH,
         ADVOCATE)

         AND



    1.   STATE OF H.P. THROUGH
         SECRETARY REVENUE TO THE
         GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL




         PRADESH, SHIMLA.
    2.   SECRETARY PANCHAYAT TO





         THE GOVERNMENT OF
         HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
    3.   SECRETARY PANCHAYAT





         KRANGLA, GPO KRANGLA,
         TEHSIL NAJKHERI,
         GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL
         PRADESH, SHIMLA.
    4.   JIA LAL, SON OF LATE SH. DHANI
         RAM, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
         DHARAN, POST OFFICE
         KRANGLA, TEHSIL NANKHARI,
         DISTRICT SHIMLA (H.P.).
    5.   SUBHADRA DEVI, WIFE OF JIA
         LAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
         DHARAN, POST OFFICE




                                          ::: Downloaded on - 24/08/2022 20:03:38 :::CIS
                                      2


         KRANGLA, TEHSIL NANKHARI,
         DISTRICT SHIMLA (H.P.).

        (BY MR. ANIL JASWAL,
        ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE
        GENERAL)




                                                                    .
    ______________________________________________________





                This Writ Petition coming on for admission this day,





    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Sabina, passed the following:

                             ORDER

Petitioner has filed the petition under Article 226 of "A) to the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief(s):

That the name of the respondent No.5 be struck off/erased from Record of Rights as wife of respondent No.4 by directing respondent No.1 to do the needful as the same be declared illegal, null and void, further keeping in view the rights of the petitioner and her son due to such illegal entry in the Shajra and Record of Rights.
B) That the respondent No.2 alongwith respondent No.4 be saddled with exemplary cost of Rupees one lakh for not conducting proper inquiry before making such incomplete entry in the Parivar Register inspite of notice dated 28.07.2021 and further by not correcting the said illegal entry made by respondent No.4. The predecessors in interest of respondent No.3 ::: Downloaded on - 24/08/2022 20:03:38 :::CIS 3 have not adopted due process of law before making such entry in the Parivar Register. C) That the concerned authorities i.e. respondent No.2 & No.3 alongwith .

respondent No.4 be questioned and held responsible for carrying out this process of making incomplete and illegal entries in the Electoral Roll and Parivar Register against the provision of law with the entries qua Annexure P-5 and the same be struck off, as no date of birth of two illegitimate children have been entered in the Parivar Register."

2. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, we are of the opinion that the instant petition deserves dismissal.

3. The present case involves disputed questions of fact. It is the case of the petitioner that she got married with respondent No.4 on 7th October, 1978. Petitioner had filed a criminal complaint against respondent No.4 under Sections 494 & 109 of Indian Penal Code, but the same was dismissed vide order dated 10.01.1984 (Annexure P-

1). It is also the case of the petitioner that she was residing separately from respondent No.4 for the last 35 years. Petitioner alongwith her son is residing at village ::: Downloaded on - 24/08/2022 20:03:38 :::CIS 4 Bahli. Son of the petitioner had got married in the year 2021. Petitioner had filed a civil suit for maintenance in the year 2005 and in the said case, respondent No.4 was .

directed to pay maintenance to the petitioner to the tune of Rs.2,000/- per month.

4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, no ground for interference while exercising the extra ordinary jurisdiction by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is made out. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail other appropriate remedy available to her, as per law.

5. Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.







                                                      ( Sabina )
                                                        Judge




                                                 ( Sushil Kukreja )
    August 24, 2022                                  Judge
       (Yashwant)




                                             ::: Downloaded on - 24/08/2022 20:03:38 :::CIS