Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 331 (HP)

Jaswant Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2025-03-10

AJAY MOHAN GOEL

body2025
JUDGMENT : Ajay Mohan Goel, J. 1. By way of these petitions, the petitioners have, inter alia, prayed for the following relief:- “That the notification dated 22.12.2001 at Annexure P-2 may very kindly be quashed and set aside.” 2. Annexure P-2, dated 22.12.2001, is the Notification issued by Financial Commissioner-cum-Secretary (Revenue), to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, in exercise of powers vested under Section 16 of H.P. Holdings (Consolidation of Prevention ofFragmentation) Act, 1971, ordering the cancellation of Notification, dated 30.04.1984, issued by Director, Consolidation of Holdings regarding the consolidation of Village Gahlien, District Hamirpur, H.P. 3. There is a very small controversy involved in these writ petitions. As per the submissions made by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are owners in possession of land situated in Village Gahli/Ghalian, Tehsil Nadaun, District Hamirpur, H.P. These villages were notified for consolidation operation on 30.04.1984, by Director, Consolidation of Holdings under Section 16 of the H.P. Holdings (Consolidation of Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1971. The process was started in the village pursuant to aforesaid Notification and thereafter, for the purpose of consolidation, a scheme was prepared. It is averred in the petitions that the consolidation is the mode of partition for re-partition of entire holdings of the village, which is firstly put in under common pool and after the formulation of the Consolidation Scheme, the re-partition is done in the village amongst more than hundred land owners. It is further the case of the petitioners that after the consolidation of holdings, the possession of the land was allotted and handed over to the respective owners. The process was completed in the village in the year 1988-89. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that after the consolidation process was over, the petitioners are now in possession of the land as was allotted to them and their peaceful possession now stands disturbed by way of impugned Notification. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that at the time of issuance of the Notification (supra), two revisions were pending under Section 54 of the Act, which were dismissed on the basis of impugned Notification. He accordingly submitted that as the impugned Notification has the effect of undoing what was initially done when the villagers were put under consolidation, the writ petitions be allowed, as prayed for. 4. He accordingly submitted that as the impugned Notification has the effect of undoing what was initially done when the villagers were put under consolidation, the writ petitions be allowed, as prayed for. 4. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General by placing reliance on the stand of the respondents has submitted that in terms of Annexure P-2/T, dated 30.05.2002, issued by Land Consolidation Officer (appended with CWP No.55 of 2003), all right holders of Mohal Gahila, Tappa Galod, stood informed that the consolidation carried in the said Tikka was cancelled by Financial Commissioner, vide Notification, dated 22.12.2001 and as this power was exercised strictly in-consonance with the provisions of the Act, there is no merit in the petitions. 5. Learned Additional Advocate General, by placing reliance on the preliminary submissions, argued that after the consolidation process was initiated, certain representations were filed for cancellation of the consolidation process and on the basis of the representations so filed, the consolidation process was cancelled. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the pleadings as well as documents appended therewith. 7. The H.P. Holdings (Consolidation of Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1971 has been introduced to provide for the consolidation of agriculture holdings and for preventing the fragmentation of agricultural holdings in the State of Himachal Pradesh and for the assignment or reservation of land for common purposes of the village. Chapter-III of the same deals with revision and correction of records and consolidation of holdings. In terms of Section 14 of the Act, the State Government may declare that in the interests of the general public and for the purposes of better cultivation of land it has decided to make a scheme of consolidation for any estate or a group of estates or a sub-division of an estate and such declaration shall be published in the Official Gazette and in the estate or estates concerned in the prescribed manner. The effect of publication is provided in Section 15 of the Act and in terms thereof, on the publication of the declaration under Section 14, an estate, group of estates or a sub-division of an estate, as the case may be, shall be deemed to be under consolidation operations from the date of such publication until the publication of the Notification that the consolidation operations have been closed. Section 16 of the Act deals with cancellation of declaration under Section 14 and it provides that the State Government may at any time, cancel the declaration made under Section 14 in respect of the whole or any part of the area specified therein and where a declaration has been cancelled in respect of any area under Sub-section (1), then such area shall, with effect from the date of cancellation, ceases to be under consolidation operations. 8. Coming to the facts of this case, in terms of Notification, dated 22.12.2001, the State Government cancelled the Notification of Consolidation issued on 30.04.1984. 9. As already observed hereinabove, the effect of cancellation of declaration in terms of Section 16 of the Act is that where a declaration is cancelled in respect of any area under sub-section (1) of Section 16 of the Act, such area shall, with effect from the date of cancellation ceases to be under consolidation operations. This means that Section 16 has prospective operation and not retrospective operation. For ready reference, Section 16 of the Act is quoted hereinbelow:- “16. Cancellation of declaration under section 14: (1) The State Government may at any time cancel the declaration made under section 14 in respect of the whole or any part of the area specified therein. (2) Where a declaration has been cancelled in respect of any area under sub-section (1), such area shall, with effect from the date of cancellation cease to be under consolidation operations.” 10. In this view of the matter, that the cancellation of the declaration in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 16 of the Act shall have prospective effect, because the statutory provision itself says that where a declaration has been cancelled in respect of any area, then such area with effect from the date of cancellation ceases to be under consolidation operations and the things which already stand done cannot be undone. That is not the intent of the provisions of Section 16 of the Act. Moreover, here in this case, the consolidation proceedings commenced in the year 1984 and same were cancelled in the year 2001 by a non speaking Notification. 11. That is not the intent of the provisions of Section 16 of the Act. Moreover, here in this case, the consolidation proceedings commenced in the year 1984 and same were cancelled in the year 2001 by a non speaking Notification. 11. In fact, it appears in the present case that after the issuance of Notification under Section 14 of the Act, much water had flown and but of course, the rights which stood fructified in favour of certain persons like the petitioners, cannot otherwise be taken away, as is being spelled out in the reply filed by the State. 12. Therefore, in the light of the observations made hereinabove, these petitions are disposed of with the direction that the effect of issuance of Notification under Section 16 of the Act has to be construed in terms of the language of the Section and its operation has to be construed to be prospective. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.