2026:HHC:29094 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMP(M) No. 1105 of 2026 Decided on: 16.07.2026 Sh. Madan Lal and another …….Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 _____________________________________________________ For the petitioners : M/s Ravinder Singh Chandel and Pooja Thakur, Advocates. For the respondents : Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General for the respondents- State. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this application, a prayer has been made for condonation of delay in filing the accompanying review petition, seeking review of order passed by this Court on 25.02.2025 in CWP No. 13980 of 2024, titled as Surinder Chauhan and another vs. Stte of Himachal Pradesh and others. Said writ petition was disposed of by this court on 25.022025, by passing the following order:- “3. Today, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner on instructions submits that Mr. Naresh S/o Mela Ram, R/o village Bagain Jubber, P.O. Ghaleya, has been persuaded to remove the encroachment so that the ambulance road can be constructed and he has assured that the encroachment shall be removed by him. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that in the light of the said development, interest of 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:29094 justice would be served in case this petition is disposed of with the direction that now let the construction of ambulance road be completed by the Authorities as expeditiously as possible. 4. In the light of the said developments this writ petition is disposed of with the direction that immediately after the removal of the encroachment by Sh. Naresh let the construction/completion work of the ambulance road be immediately taken up, expeditiously and completed within a period of three months thereafter. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand disposed of accordingly.” A careful perusal of the said paras of writ petition demonstrate that there is no observation whatsoever, adverse or otherwise, made by this Court against the review petitioners. Accordingly, it is not understood in which portion of the order, there is an error apparent on the face of the record. This Court is reiterating that no observation whatsoever has been made by this Court either in favor or against the review petitioners. Therefore, as the review petition is completely misconceived, the application as well as the review petition, are accordingly dismissed. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge July 16 , 2026 (narender)