2025:HHC:27415 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWPIL No. 66 of 2024 Decided on: 11 th August , 2025 __________________________________________________ Bar Association, Jasinghpur District Kangra ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others ...Respondents ___________________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Vikas Rathore, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Gobind Korla, Additional Advocate General, for the respondents-State. Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, Senior Advocate with Mr. Abhinav M. Goel, Advocate, for respondent No.6. Mr. Vinay Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No.7 to 11. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral) The present Public Interest Litigation had been filed for construction of Judicial Court Complex at Jaisinghpur whereby 8 kanals of land were identified near Mini Secretariat 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? and were transferred to Judicial Department on 28.08.2012. 2. It was stated that efforts were being made to explore alternative sites for the construction of Judicial Court Complex which apparently have been opposed and thus the intention as such of the petitioner is that the above-mentioned chunk of land should be utilized. 3. In our order dated 11.04.2025, we noticed that the Administrative Judge on 21.02.2024 had found that the site was insufficient and the access to the site was not proper. We then noticed that a request has also been made for demolishing the existing old construction, where the Court of learned Civil Judge, Jaisinghpur is currently functioning and to make the new Court Complex at the said spot. We also noticed that there was sufficient space available, apart from noticing certain other factors and we impleaded respondent No.6 as party in the petition. 4. Thereafter on 21.05.2025, we noticed that prima facie, we were of the opinion that Proposal No.II as such brought on record by 28.04.2025, which provided that the existing old Judicial Court Complex needs to be demolished 2 entirely and half of the Basketball Court was also to be demolished with the existing road adjoining to Judicial Court Complex to be shifted by 4 mtrs. Similarly, the shifting of existing transformer was also required. 5. In the meantime, a meeting was also held of the Building and Infrastructure Committee on 03.07.2025, whereby the following decisions were taken. “Item No.6. Consideration of the matter regarding approval of following proposal for the construction of Judicial Court Complex, Jaisinghpur. 1. That the existing old Tehsil Building presently used as Judicial Court Complex be demolished. 2. Complete badminton court and approximate 1/8th area of basket ball court will be demolished. 3. Existing road adjoining to Judicial Court Complex towards rest house be shifted by 4 mtrs. 4. 01 No. electrical pole be shifted for construction of new road.” 6. Counsel for the petitioner now has also placed on record the communication of the District and Sessions Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala, wherein it has been written to the Deputy Commissioner, Kangra at Dharamshala, regarding the proposal as such which has been approved by the Committee which had been communicated vide letter dated 10/11.07.2025. 7. Apparently, the District and Sessions Judge, Kangra has also referred to Proposal No.I that has been 3 approved. However, a close reading of the said Proposal No.I and II would go on to show that communication of the District and Sessions Judge is not clear and there is lack of clarity of what is to be done. 8. In our considered opinion, the existing old building has to be demolished totally and that was the decision in sum and substance taken by the Committee and the Proposal No.I which has been communicated to the Deputy Commissioner, Kangra at H.P., whereby it has been suggested that partial demolition is not the intent of the Committee which would be clear from the counter Proposal No.II, whereby it has been proposed that demolition has to be in its entirety. 9. Resultantly, we dispose of the present petition by directing the District and Sessions Judge, Kangra also to clarify the manner in which the new Court at Jaisinghpur has to be constructed and it has to be strictly in terms of Item No.6 of the Committee’s report. The application filed by Mr. Vinay Sharma, Advocate, whereby a proposal for a different site in question, is rejected on the ground that the authorities have done the spade work, and it has been found that the current 4 court as such is at a prime location in the center of the area whereas all other sites as noticed were at a considerable distance from Jaisinghpur and having various difficulties which the State was not able to resolve. Therefore, fallback has been made to utilise the existing Court Complex by reconstructing the same. 10. Resultantly, we dispose of the present petition with the aforesaid observations. Accordingly, the State shall take the necessary steps to do the needful and to provide alternate site in working condition for the Court staff at Jaisinghpur during the time the demolition/construction process is going on. 11. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. ( G.S. Sandhawalia ) Chief Justice 11 th August , 2025 ( Ranjan Sharma ) (ankit) Judge 5