2025:HHC:41626 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. LPA No.617 of 2025 Decided on: 01.12.2025 Ajay Ohri ......Appellant Versus Union of India & Others ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the appellant : Mr. Deepak Kaushal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aditya Chouhan, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Balram Sharma, DSGI with Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Rakesh Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.2 to 4-State. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice(Oral) Consideration is sought of the impugned order passed by learned Single Judge, in CWP No.11922 of 2025, decided on 24.07.2025, whereby, the learned Single Judge was of the considered opinion that the writ petitioner had approached the Court after a delay of two years as the environment clearance was granted to the petitioner by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change on 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2025:HHC:41626 ) 24.6.2003. The writ petition was filed on 22.7.2025. The reason given as such was that for the period of two years the petitioner had not challenged the same and now once mining activities are undertaken, he had to deposit the money and the challenge has been raised and, therefore, it could not be said that the writ petition had been filed after a reasonable time. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the demand as such of Corporate Social Responsibility on individuals is not applicable and the specific plea has been taken. Moreso, keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is an individual applicant who sought a mining lease for the extraction of minor minerals and, therefore, the directions to deposit a sum of Rs.4 lacs per hectare under the said provision could not apply to him. The proceeding will be without jurisdiction and therefore, there could be no delay and laches in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. It is further argued that even otherwise issue of delay and laches could have been suitably balanced by giving the relief from date of filing of the writ petition and after calling for the reply and the dismissal of the writ petition in limine without even completion of pleadings was not justified. 4. Counsel for the State, on the other hand, has sought to justify the order of the learned Single Judge. Keeping in view the factual matrix, we are of the considered 2025:HHC:41626 ) opinion that without having called for the reply, the writ petition has been dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. It is also not disputed that the lease is for the period of five years and renewal can be also there and, therefore, there is recurring cause of action. Even otherwise the relief could have been duly modified if need be once the pleadings were complete. The issue whether the responsibility could be fastened upon the petitioner being an individual, is also another moot question. 5. Thus keeping in view the above consideration, we are of the considered opinion that the writ petition was not liable to be dismissed in limine without calling for the reply. Resultantly, we quash the order under appeal and the petitioner, whose valuable and civil rights have been affected, has rightly sought the redressal of his grievances. 6. In such circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the order of learned Single Judge is not sustainable and resultantly we set aside the same and remand the matter for decision on merits after pleadings are complete. 7. Matter be listed before the Registrar (Judicial) on 15.12.2025 for completion of pleadings by the State and once the pleadings are complete, matter be listed before the learned Single Judge as per roster. Parties to put in appearance before the Registrar (Judicial). 2025:HHC:41626 ) 8. In view of the above, the appeal is disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. ( G.S. Sandhawalia ) Chief Justice December 01, 2025 (mamta) ( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj) Judge