State of H.P. and others versus Tulsi Ram & Others CMP(M) No.237 of 2025 Item No.D-2 06.06.2025 Present: Mr. Gobind Korla, Additional Advocate General, for the applicants. CMP(M) No.237 of 2025 Inter alia contends that it is the case of the landowners themselves that the road utilization started in the year 1996-1997 only because they had filed the representation on 28.04.2016 and got directions for decision on the same would not give them a right to file writ petition having accepted the usage of the land on account of the implied consent. It is submitted that rejection order was also passed on 12.12.2019 [Annexure R-1] by the Principal Secretary (PWD) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh whereby this fact was noticed that the road was constructed on the demand of the people of the area and the persons themselves had surrendered the land for road connectivity. It is, thus, submitted that the judgment of the Apex Court in case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Digambar (1995) 4 SCC 683 would come into play. The learned Single Judge did not deal with the said order and therefore, the issuance of direction, as such, for acquiring the land without the writ petition being amended was not justified which was utilized for the construction of Garsa to Diyar Road. For the reasons stated in the application delay of 21 days in filing the present appeal is condoned. Application stands disposed of. CMP No.____ of 2025 [CMPST No.6854/25] Be Registered. Notice be issued to the respondents, returnable for 30.06.2025. In the meanwhile, operation of judgment dated 22.10.2024 in CWP No.623/2019 is stayed. LPA _____of 2025 Be registered. Notice be issued to the respondents, returnable for 30.06.2025. List alongwith CMP(M) No. 200 of 2025. (G. S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice 6th June, 2025 (Ranjan Sharma) [himani/shivender] Judge