1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 8915/2026 Decided on: 03.06.2026 Mast Ram …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P and others ..Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Madhurika Sekhon Verma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate General, Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General for respondents No. 1, 2 and 4. Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs:- “(i). Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to acquire the entire property including the petitioner’s house, or in the alternative, assess and pay adequate compensation for the loss and damage caused to the petitioner’s house due to construction of the four-lane project. (ii). Direct the respondents to provide immediate rehabilitation or alternative accommodation to the petitioner and his family until final compensation or acquisition is made. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 (iii). Direct the respondents to conduct a proper technical and structural safety inspection of the affected area, including the petitioner’s house, and take remedial measures to prevent further damage. (iv). Direct the respondents to consider and decide the petitioner’s representations (Annexure P-5, colly) within a time- bound period.” 2. Petitioner’s grievance as highlighted by his learned counsel is that on account of unscientific construction of four-lane National Highway-154 (Mandi- Pathankot) extensive damage has been caused to petitioner’s house/land comprised in Khata Khatauni No.78/82, Khasra No.506/439/254, measuring 0-17-17 hectares, situated at Revenue Village Kunnu, Tehsil Padhar, District Mandi, H.P. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that repeated representations of the petitioner to the concerned authorities have not elicited any response. Learned counsel submits that petitioner would be satisfied in case respondent No.2- The Deputy Commissioner, Mandi is directed to consider and take appropriate call on the representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-5, colly.) dated 04.04.2025. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 3. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent 3 No.2/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 04.04.2025 (Annexure P-5, colly.) in accordance with law after hearing all the stake holders including the petitioner, within a period of eight weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua June 03, 2026 Judge yogesh