IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.16154 of 2025 Decided on 14th October, 2025 Gobinder Nath …Petitioner Versus Union of India and others …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. Sudhir Thakur, Senior Advocate, with M/s Karun Negi and Somesh Sharma, Advocates. For the respondents : Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy Solicitor General of India. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:- i) “To issue the writ of certiorari of writ of similar nature thereby issuing quashing and setting aside the cancellation of license of shops of the petitioners (Annexure P-4) ii) To issue the writ of mandamus or writ of similar nature thereby issuing directing the respondent authorities not to interfere in the smooth working of the shop No.6 by the petitioner in any manner and not to dispossess the petitioners from the shops in questions constructed over the land (Annexure P-1).” 2 2. The impugned order is Annexure P-4, which reads as under:- “In reference to above noted subject, the agreement executed between you and Railway department has been expired long ago. Now a day’s this shop is unauthorized and this shop should be vacated. Hence you are instructed to vacate the Railway shop within one week otherwise disciplinary action under PPE Act, 1971 will be taken by competent Authority.” 3. This Court is of the considered view that the petition is premature. It goes without saying that the Authorities have a right to get the premises vacated from the petitioner if he is in unauthorized occupation thereof but strictly in accordance with law. In these circumstances as the present proceedings are pre- mature, the same are closed with the observation that the respondents shall proceed against the petitioner if so advised strictly in accordance with law. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge October 14, 2025 (Vinod)