IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.13044 of 2026 Date of Decision: 15.09.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Smt. Savitri Devi ……...Petitioner Versus NHAI & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Ms. Deepmala Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Karan Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for respondents No.2 & 3. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Though short reply on behalf of respondent No. 1 stands filed, but learned counsel representing the petitioner states that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case direction is issued to respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the pending representation dated 29.05.2026 (Annexure P-4) in a time-bound manner. 2. Learned counsel representing the respondents are not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the same 2 with a direction to respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass appropriate orders. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma ) Judge September 15, 2026 (sunil)