IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.11163 of 2024 Decided on: 14th August, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Raj Kumar and others …..Petitioners Versus Union of India and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Ankit Chandel, Advocate vice Ms. Manju Dhatwalia, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Nand Lal Thakur, Senior Panel Counsel, for respondents No.1 to 4 and 7. Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.5, 6 and 8 to 10. Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior Advocate with Ms. Kamakshi Tarlokta, Advocate, for respondent No.11. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Following order was passed in this matter on 01.10.2024:- “Notice. Mr. Nand Lal Thakur, learned Senior Panel Counsel and Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4 & 7 and respondents No.5, 6 & 8 to 10, respectively. Learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes to provide the local address of respondent No.11. Issue 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes 2 notice to respondent No.11 at the local address to be provided by learned counsel for the petitioners, returnable for 23.10.2024. In addition to the ordinary service, as prayed for, the petitioners shall also be at liberty to serve the said respondent by way of dasti. Steps for service alongwith correct local address of respondent No.11 be furnished within three days. 2. The allegations leveled by the petitioners are that respondent No.11 is resorting to blasting for the construction of Tunnel T-10 between chainage 27.700 to 32.100 of Bhanupali-Bilaspur-Beri, New Railway Line, near Village Kharian, Post Office Swahan, Tehsil Shri Naina Devi Ji, District Bilaspur in violation of the terms and conditions of the No Objection Certificate issued by respondent No.5 in favour of respondent No.11 on 18.05.2022 under the Explosive Rules, 2008. That on account of uncontrolled blasting in violation of the conditions imposed upon respondent No.11, the petitioners have already suffered damages to their property. That the petitioners apprehend loss to their lives and properties on account of continued illegal and uncontrolled blasting resorted to by respondent No.11 in violation of the norms/conditions. 3. In view of the nature of allegations leveled by the petitioners, let respondent No.5-the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Bilaspur to look into the grievances of the petitioners by inspecting the site after associating all stakeholders including respondent No.3-the Project Manager, Chandigarh Rail Vikas Nigam Limited, Bhanupali to Beri Railway Line, respondent No.7-the Deputy Chief Controller of Explosives, Chandigarh or its authorized Officer, respondent No.9-the State Geologist concerned, Directorate of Industries, respondent No.10-the Assistant Geologist-cum-Mining Officer Solan and respondent No.11-the Executing Agency. Status report be furnished by respondent No.5 on the next date of hearing. 4. List on 23.10.2024. 5. Reply to the petition on behalf of the appearing respondents be also filed in the meanwhile. The concerned officers/officials shall ensure that the blasting will be carried out only in accordance with law.” 3 2. On the next date, i.e. 23.10.2024, the order so passed reads as under:- “Perusal of communication, dated 22.10.2024, issued under the signatures of Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh, reveals that pursuant to the directions contained in order dated 01.10.2024, Deputy Commissioner after having associated the senior Officers as directed by this Court vide afore order visited the spot to ascertain the correctness of the allegations levelled in the petition. Careful perusal of the aforesaid status report and documents annexed therewith, which are taken on record, clearly suggests that blasting on the spot is being carried out strictly in terms of the “No Objection Certificate” as well as rules occupying the field, however, status report is totally silent about the alleged damage caused to the house of the petitioner on account of blasting done for construction of tunnel. In view of above, learned Additional Advocate General is directed to ensure filing of status report on the affidavit of Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur, detailing therein factum with regard to visit of the Joint Inspection Committee as well as status of work, compliance of Rules occupying the field and damage, if any, caused to the house of the petitioner or other similarly situate persons. Needful in terms of instant order shall be done by the respondents on or before the next date of hearing, failing which, Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur shall remain present in Court on 3rd December, 2024.” 3. Respondents have filed the reply. 4. At this stage, learned vice counsel appearing for the petitioners sought permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to seek appropriate remedy in accordance with law for the redressal of petitioners’ grievances raised in this writ petition. Learned counsel 4 further submitted that the period spent in pursuing this writ petition be also excluded for the limitation purpose. Prayer is accepted. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty, as prayed for. The period spent in pursuing this litigation shall be excluded for limitation purpose. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua August 14, 2026 Judge Mukesh