Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:25022 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMP No.18064 of 2025 and LPA No.492 of 2025. Date of Decision: 29.07.2025 Om Parkash through Inder Singh ...Applicant/Appellant Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others ....Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Applicant/Appellant : Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Gobind Korla, Additional Advocate General. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral). CMP No.18064 of 2025 and LPA No.492 of 2025. The present Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order dated 11.07.2025, passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No.6986 of 2025 titled Sh. Roop Singh & another Vs. State of H.P. & Ors., whereby the directions were issued regarding removal of encroachments. 2. The present Appeal is accompanied with application being CMP No.18064 of 2025 for grant of leave to appeal on the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 ground that the appellant was not a party as such in the writ petition. It is averred in the application that in the proceedings certain prejudicial observations have been made against him. It has further been mentioned in the application that the applicant/appellant as such is mentally retarded and is being taken care of by his elder brother Inder Singh. 3. A perusal of the writ record would go on to show that the allegations in the writ as such were against the private respondent No.4-Govind Ram son of Sh. Dasu Ram who is also the brother of the present applicant/appellant and his brother Inder Singh. Apparently, during the course of proceedings also, counsel for private respondent No.4 has put the onus upon the present applicant/appellant regarding the encroachment, in view of which certain directions have been issued. 4. In the application for grant of leave to appeal also, it has been mentioned that oral partition inter se three sons, namely-Govind Ram, Inder Singh and Om Prakash has been done and the fact that there is certain construction as such and the averments have been made that the present applicant/appellant had no opportunity to present his case before the learned Single Judge. 3 5. Issue Notice. Mr. Gobind Korla, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3-State. 6. Keeping in view the above, we are of the considered opinion that the interest of the present applicant/appellant would be protected if an opportunity is granted to him to file an appropriate application before the learned Single Judge bringing all the facts on record. Apparently the onus has been put upon the present appellant by his brother Govind Ram and therefore, the directions might have adverse effect as such, on his rights. 7. Resultantly, we deem it proper to dispose of the present appeal with liberty to applicant/appellant to approach the learned Single Judge by filing the appropriate application as it is also noticed that since apparently, pleadings were not completed before the learned Single Judge and no reply has been filed by the private respondents also. 8. In view of above, the present appeal is disposed of with the above liberty along with application for leave to appeal. Needless to say that we are not commenting on the merits of the case and the applicant/appellant is at liberty to challenge the order, which will be passed in the application to be filed before the learned Single Judge, within ten days from today. 4 9. In the meantime, the State will hold its hands regarding the directions issued and it is open to the learned Single Judge to take into consideration the interim relief, if any, to be granted, if he deems fit in the application. 10. Pending miscellaneous application(s) if any, shall also stand disposed of. (G.S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice (Ranjan Sharma) Judge 29th July, 2025 (munish thakur)