2025:HHC:33878 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.7728 of 2025 Decided on: 06.10.2025 Dharam Chand & another … Petitioners Versus Union of India & others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________ _ For the petitioners : Ms. Kiran Verma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Virbahadur Verma, CGC, for respondent No.1. Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.2, 4, 5 and 6-State. Mr. Ajay Chandel, Advocate, for respondent No.7. Ms. Rajni Gandhi, Advocate, vice Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioners have, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- “a. To issue a writ of Mandamus or direction in the nature there of directing the respondent No. 1 and 5 to take preventative measures to protect the house/land/courtyard of the petitioner by laying RCC concrete wall on khasra no 560 Muhal Kothi, Kunangoo circle Rakhoo, Patwar Circle Cholthara, to protect the house of the petitioners situated at Muhal Bassi-Kothi post office Cholthara Tehsil Sarkaghat District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:33878 b. To direct the respondents to reconstruct the path leading to the houses of the petitioners, which was demolished by them.” 2. The petitioners are praying for issuance of direction to respondents No.1 to 5 to take preventive measures to protect the property of the petitioners. Respondents No.1 to 5 in their reply have, inter alia, stated that for the purpose of raising the retaining wall, the land of the private respondent, i.e. respondent No.7, requires to be utilized and he is not permitting the same. 3. Learned Counsel for respondent No.7 submits that the land in issue is joint of the petitioners and respondent No.7 has no objection if the land is to be used, but for that, let respondent No.7 be compensated either by the petitioners or by the authorities in accordance with law. He submits that the land be acquired in accordance with law, compensation be paid to the respondent and thereafter, the land can be utilized for whatever purpose respondents No.1 to 5 intend to use the same. 4. In light of the fact that as it could not be disputed that the petitioners want respondents No.1 to 5 to raise a retaining wall upon the land which admittedly belongs to the petitioners as well as respondent No.7 because they are joint owners of the same, no 3 2025:HHC:33878 mandamus, as prayed for, can be issued until and unless either respondent No.7 voluntarily gives up the land for the purpose of construction of the retaining wall or the land is acquired in accordance with law or respondent No.7 is otherwise compensated, may be by the petitioners. 5. Petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge October 06, 2025 (Rishi)