2025:HHC:39034 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 17959 of 2025 Decided on : 19.11.2025 Shashi Pal …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Goldy Kumar, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- “(i) That the impugned order dated 21.08.2025 (Annexure P-3) passed by Respondent No.3 Collector, Sub- Divisional Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. and Notice dated 27.10.2025 (Annexure P-4) passed by Respondent No. 4, Temple officer-cum-Tehsildar Mandir Damtal, Tehsil 1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:39034 Indora, District Kangra, H.P, may kindly be quashed and set aside by issuing writ of certiorari and justice may be done. (ii) That the respondents may be directed not to evict the petitioner from the land in question and further unlock the house of Petitioner during the winter session, by issuing writ of mandamus.” 2. With the consent of the parties, this petition is being disposed of at this stage itself. 3. The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 21.08.2025, in terms whereof, he has been ordered to be evicted from the demised premises. 4. The Court called upon the petitioner to have instructions as to whether the petitioner is willing to vacate the premises within some reasonable time and to this learned counsel on instruction stated that the petitioner be protected as up to the month of April, 2026 and thereafter, he will vacate the premises. 5. Taking into consideration the fairness at the end of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this petition is disposed of with the direction that let the possession of the premises be 3 2025:HHC:39034 retained by the petitioner up to 30.06.2026 and he shall vacate the same on or before the said date, on payment of use and occupation charges of Rs.2,000/- per month by the petitioner, as from the month of November, 2025, in addition to any other payments, which may be due to the respondent from the petitioner. It goes without saying that in case the petitioner fails to do the needful by 30.06.2026 then the same shall amount to willful disobedience of the Court order. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that premises in issue are locked. Authorities are directed to open the premises and gave the possession thereof physically to the petitioner to enable him to use the same up to 30.06.2025. 7. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Temple Authorities have let out certain premises on rental basis to individuals and it be observed that disposal of this petition shall not come in way of the petitioner to otherwise approach the Authority afresh to rent out the property to him. Observed accordingly. 8. The petition is disposed of in above terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of 4 2025:HHC:39034 accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge November 19, 2025 (Shivank Thakur)