Gopal Krishan v. State of HP and Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No. 13645 of 2026

Decided on: 10.08.2026

Gopal Krishan and Ors.

.…Petitioners.

Versus

State of H.P. and Anr. …Respondents.

Coram

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia, Chief Justice.

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bipin C. Negi, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1

For the petitioners : Mr. Bhart Bhardwaj, Advocate.

For the respondents : Ms. Priyanka Chauhan, Deputy

Advocate General for respondent

No.1.

: Mr. C.N. Singh, Advocate, for

respondent No.2.

G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral)

Challenge in the present writ petition is to the Auction Notice dated 01.07.2026 (Annexure P-4) qua commercial plot measuring 414.80 sqm. situated in

Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2 ( 2026:HHC:33459 ) Housing Colony Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P. The reserve price of the plot has been fixed at Rs.70,00,000/- lacs.

2.

The argument which is sought to be raised is that the settlement operation in Sundernagar Mohal including Sundernagar town was to commence from

21.04.2023 and is yet to be completed as per the directions issued on 16.01.2022 by the Co-ordinate Bench in CWP No. 243 of 2020, titled as Jai Singh Vs. State of H.P. and Ors.

3.

We have gone through the record and find that the petitioners are immediate neighbors of the plot in question to be auctioned. The details of their plots are given as under:-

Sr. No. Petitioner Khata Number Khatoni Number Khasra Number Area

Gopal Krishan

5696/4319 1394 sqm.

¶2Ramesh Kumar

5697/4319 1394 sqm.

¶3Dila Ram 5695/4319 1435 sqm.

4.

Admittedly, the plot sought to be auctioned, forms a part of another khasra number i.e. Khasra 3 ( 2026:HHC:33459 ) No. 4519/4319, measuring 905 sqm. as reflected in the revenue record placed on record. There is also a construction existing over the said land, which is stated to be a house. The ownership, as such, of plot No.3 is also of respondent No.2, who has to auction the property.

5.

In such circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that if the petitioners have any grievance, as such, regarding the plots regarding their possession, it is totally independent of the right of respondent No. 2 to auction the property which belongs to them. The petitioners have no locus-standi to question the right of the owner to sell its property merely because they are in occupation of the adjoining plot. It is apparently a case, where, by way of an indirect manner, an injunction has been sought regarding the land in question. Therefore, we do not feel that it is a fit case to exercise the one extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.

6.

Needless to say, it is always open to the petitioners to get their plots demarcated, if so advised.

4 ( 2026:HHC:33459 )

7.

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

(G.S. Sandhawalia)

Chief Justice

(Bipin C. Negi)

Judge 10th August, 2026 (sushma)