2025:HHC:37301 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.17008 of 2025 a/w CWP No.17009 of 2025, CWP No.17048 of 2025 & CWP No.16994 of 2025 Decided on: 06.11.2025 CWP No.17008 of 2025 Smt. Roop Dassi … Petitioner Versus Union of India & others … Respondents CWP No.17009 of 2025 Adarsh Gulati & another … Petitioners Versus Union of India & others … Respondents CWP No.17048 of 2025 Rohit Thakur & others … Petitioners Versus Union of India & others … Respondents CWP No.16994 of 2025 Sukhwinder Kaur … Petitioner Versus Union of India & others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________ _ For the petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudhir Thakur, Senior Advocate with Mr. Karun Negi, Advocate, in all the petitions. For the respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjay Singh Chauhan, Central Government Counsel, for respondent 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:37301 No.1, in CWPs No.17008, 17009 and 16994 of 2025 and Mr. Janak Raj, Central Government Counsel, for respondent No.1, in CWP No.17048 of 2025. Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.2, in all the petitions. Mr.Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, for the respondents-State, in all the petitions. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) In all these petitions the petitioners have assailed the orders passed by the Divisional Commissioner, in terms whereof, the applications filed by them for the release of the amount have been dismissed on the ground that the arbitration proceedings are pending. 2. With the consent of the parties all these repetitions are disposed of with the direction that the arbitration proceedings which are pending before the learned Divisional Commissioner-cum- Arbitrator, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., be decided positively before 31.12.2025, by passing orders thereupon in accordance with law. The contention raised by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners that whether or not the statutory time period for deciding the petitions stands expired shall also be taken into consideration by the learned Arbitrator while deciding the same. 3. The parties through Counsel are directed to appear before the learned Divisional Commissioner on 20.11.2025, on the 3 2025:HHC:37301 said date the details of all the cases which are pending intra the parties, filed by either of the parties, shall be brought into the notice of the parties so that there is no confusion between the parties as to as to what are the litigation pending between them. 4. In light of above observation the impugned order, in terms whereof, the applications filed by the parties for disbursal of the amount, stands set aside. The applications are restored to their original number and shall be decided by the Divisional Commissioner in light of the adjudication to be made in the arbitration proceedings. It is further observed that the parties shall corporate with the Divisional Commissioner for the adjudication of the cases within the time framed granted. 5. The petitions stand disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge November 06, 2025 (Rishi)