Chetan (faculty) 05 October 2026

The hp tenancy and land reforms act 1972

Greetings to All!

An application for the attestation of mutation by submitted by a Gair Marusi (Non Occupancy) tenant Under Section 104(3) of Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act 1972. After fullfilling all procedures (e.g patwari visit,patwari report, independent witnesses etc.). Tehsildar on the given hearing date asked the applicant to provide addresses of the other party to summon them.

As non of other party members live in concerned tehsil as they left the town many decades ago, the applicant submitted that he is not having address of any of them.

Thereafter, as per the directions of the tehsildar proclamation (public notice in the Govt. Revenue Gazzette) was published as under.

Office of the Land Reforms Officer-cum-Tehsildar, XXXXXX,
District XXX (H.P.)
Case No. : XXXXXXX.
Case Type : Original
Date of Hearing : DD/MM/YYYY
Case Sub-Type : Application under section 104 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land
Reforms Act, 1972.
Nature of Case : Tenancy

In the matter of :

Applicants

Respondents

NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS AND GENERAL PUBLIC

Whereas, the above-mentioned application under section 104 of the Himachal Pradesh
Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1972 relating to land comprised in Khasra Nos. XXXXXX and XXXXXX, Khata/Khatauni No. XXXXXX, measuring XXXXX Sq. Yards, situated at Mohal XXXXXXX,
Tehsil XXXXXXX, District XXXXX, Himachal Pradesh, is pending before the undersigned.
And whereas, it is considered necessary to provide an opportunity to the above-named
respondents and to all other persons having any right title, interest, claim or objection in respect of the subject matter of the application.

Notice is hereby proclaimed for information of the above-named respondents and the
general Public that they shall appear before the Court of the undersigned, Land Reforms Officer
cum-Tehsildar, XXXXXXX, on the date of hearing, i.e. DD-MM-YYYY, and file/submit their
objections, if any in respect of the aforesaid application and property. Any person having any
objection claim right title or interest in the subject matter shall appear before this Court and raise such objection on or before the aforesaid date. In case no objection is received and/or no one
appears before this court on or before DD-MM-YYYY the matter shall be proceeded with ex-parte against the non-appearing respondents/persons and further proceedings shall be taken in accordance with law without any further notice. This proclamation is issued for the information of all concerned and the general public.

Given under my hand and seal of the Court on this XX day of XXX, 2026.
Seal.
Sd/-
(XXXXXXX),
Land Reforms Officer-cum-Tehsildar,
XXXXXX, District XXXX (H.P.).

............................................................................

On the date mentioned in the Gazette to raise objections,Tehsildar was leave. After seeing the printout of Gazette, The reader of Tehsdildar gave next date of hearing after one week. Online summons regarding next hearing date received by the applicant through NIC portal as usual as under..

Dear Counsel/Appellant/Applicant, your Tenancy case no. XXXXXX is listed in Tehsildar-XXXXX on DD/MM/YYYY for Proper Order. Log in to RMS for details. RMS GoHP

On the mentioned date applicant appeared before the court of Tehsildar to get proper order, but tehsildar said as he was absent on the date mentioned in the Gazette, he will again wait for period of another one month so that the other party can raise objections if any.

My concen is : Is it statutory provision to give/favor another month period to other party dispite of the fact it was clearly mentioned in the Gazette ..matter shall be proceeded with ex-parte against the non-appearing respondents/persons and further proceedings shall be taken in accordance with law without any further notice.

Was that 7 days period between mentioned date in Gazette and next hearing date not sufficient for the other party to raise objections if any ?

As a common man, applicant see this as the court itself is intersted to be a party or acting on the behalf of other party due to unknown reasons.

Another concern is after the tehsildar told applicant to wait for another month/next date, but when applicant cheked online case status for next date summon subject matter, it was mentioned "Filing of correct address".

Applicant understand it as Tehsildar will again ask for addresses of defendents (but for what again), or may be to generate reasons to delay the proper and final order (but why).

Also, on the same/previous hearing date applicant had also submitted prayer to tehsildar in his office, concluding with following points.

.....

......

In view of:

The continuous Gair Marusi entries;
The presumption attached to revenue records;
The applicants and their predecessors have remained in continuous and peaceful possession of the land for several generations, with such possession being consistently reflected in the revenue records.;
Verification by the Land Revenue Officer/Patwari;
Corroboration by independent witnesses;
Absence of any challenge to the revenue entries;
The consistent practice of the Revenue Department in similar cases; and
Fulfilment of the statutory requirements under Section 104,

it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Authority may be pleased to confer proprietary rights upon the applicants by sanctioning mutation under Section 104 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1972, in the interest of justice.

.............................

Honorable learned members are requested to share their views on this matter.
Guide how to approach the tehsildar court in the right way to get the justice.
Any other valuable inputs regarding this matter
...

with Regards

Reply Follow

Quick Summary

This discussion concerns an application for mutation attestation under Section 104(3) of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1972. The applicant, a non-occupancy tenant, faced delays when the Tehsildar required addresses for other parties, who had long since left the area. Despite a public notice (proclamation) in the Gazette stating proceedings would be ex-parte if no objections were filed, the court granted further extensions, raising concerns about procedural fairness and potential delays. The applicant seeks guidance on navigating the Tehsildar's court to secure justice and proprietary rights.

4 Replies

Dr. J C Vashista (Advocate ) 06 October 2026

Too long a post.

Local laws apply to your query.

It is better to consult a local lawyer practicing revenue cases with relevant records for proper analyses of facts, professional advise and necessary proceeding.

Chetan (faculty) 06 October 2026

Thank you sir for your valuable guidance.

Is it a statutory provision to give/favor another month period to other party dispite of the fact it was clearly mentioned in the Govt. Gazette ...........matter shall be proceeded with ex-parte against the non-appearing respondents/persons [on the mentioned date] and further proceedings shall be taken in accordance with law without any further notice.

and there after again giving one month notice period to other party insted of passing proper order though the date was fixed for passing proper order

Regards

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Advocate) 06 October 2026

Revenue officers often exercise extreme caution regarding service of notice to avoid future litigation or ex-parte set-aside applications. However, repeated extensions after a gazette proclamation can unduly delay statutory rights.

Submit a formal application requesting the court to proceed ex-parte against the non-responding/absent parties.

Section 104(3) of the Act is statutory and automatic in nature—all rights, title, and interest of the landowner in the tenancy land stand extinguished and vest in the non-occupancy tenant by operation of law, subject to statutory conditions.

If the Tehsildra hesitates to proceed:

Request a brief, final date to record statements of local witnesses (e.g., Patwari, Gram Panchayat Pradhan, or local elders) confirming that the parties are untraceable and that the applicant remains in continuous cultivating possession.

Request that the order sheet explicitly reflect why further extensions are being granted despite valid public notice.

Chetan (faculty) 09 October 2026

Thank you Sir for your guidance in this matter.

As suggested the local witnesses (e.g., Patwari, Gram Panchayat Pradhan, or local elders) are already submitted to tehsildar through proper channel by patwari.

Revenue officials (Patwari, others..)visited the property and made a report metioning the facts(revenue records verified details), 3 witnesses of neighbours, signature of municipal council official concerned (ward member).

As I have seen the case status online it is mentioned on the next hearing date (in the end of october 20206) case fixed for filling of correct address.

Is there any statutory provision/section which gives tehsildar this power to ask again for addresses although due to the same reason(unavailability of address), proclamation (public notice) was published in the Revenue Govt. Gazette to raise objections if any.

Warm Regards