Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2017 DAILYLAW 1467 (HP)

Court on its own Motion v. STATE OF HP

CMP/10892/2025 · 2026-03-20

Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia, Sandeep Sharma

Public Interest Litigationbody2017

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Court on its own motion Vs. State of HP a/w connected matter CWPIL No.91 of 2017 a/w CWPIL No.65 of 2025 CWPIL - 91 of 2017 20.03.2026 Present: Mr. Karan Singh Parmar & Ms. Rashmi Parmar, Advocates, for the petitioner. Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rakesh Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General, for the respondent-State. CWPIL-65 of 2025 Mr. Ruchirangad Singh, Advocate vice Mr. Gaurav Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rakesh Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General, for the respondent-State. CMP No.10892 of 2025 in CWPIL No.91 of 2017 State had filed an application dated 03.01.2018 seeking extension of time to comply with the order dated 16.11.2017. A report was called for from the office, as the application had not been numbered on 20.06.2025. The explanation furnished by the office was duly considered and accepted on 04.07.2025. The necessary affidavit dated 22.08.2025 has now been filed by the earlier Chief Secretary, wherein details have been given as to the action taken regarding the directions issued and to seek necessary approval from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change including seeking ex post facto approval for the roads, which have been duly constructed. It has also been explained that the application for extension was filed on 03.01.2018 and under a bona fide belief that the matter was still pending consideration, the affidavit was not filed for compliance of the earlier order. It is further stated that then a meeting was held on 10.07.2025 to formulate a roadmap for compliance with the directions of this Court and in these circumstances, an unconditional apology has been tendered. It has also been mentioned that processing of proposals under the Forest (Conservation) Act is a time- consuming exercise, involving various nodal agencies, including the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, New Delhi. Keeping in view the affidavit filed, we are of the considered opinion that substantial compliance of the order dated 16.11.2017 has been made and no further proceedings are required to be kept pending. Accordingly, in the application filed seeking modification and directions with respect to the order dated 16.11.2017, no further orders are liable to passed. It shall, however, be open to the State to take appropriate action in accordance with law regarding the manner in which the cases are to be processed under the relevant enactments. CWPIL No.65 of 2025 Connected appeal has been disposed of. Accordingly, let the matter be listed before Division Bench as per roster on 07.05.2026. (G.S. Sandhawalia), Chief Judge (Sandeep Sharma) Judge March 20, 2026 (sunil)