IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16137 of 2026 Date of Decision: 16.9.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Kuldeep Mehrol ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Anirudh RH Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General. __________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Precisely the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Anirudh RH Sharma, Advocate, is that despite repeated requests made to Deputy Commissioner, Solan, District Solan, no steps have been taken to restore/repair the road namely Himatpur to Dabli Kheel Road ( Dharampur-Basholu), which was damaged on account of unscientific cutting of land/plotting below the road in question by a landlady namely Ms. Ranjana. Mr. Anirudh RH Sharma, learned counsel representing petitioner, states that on account of aforesaid damage caused to the road in question, great inconvenience is being caused 2 to local people, especially children, who have to cross the damaged stretch for reaching their school. Since no steps, if any, ever came to be taken on the complaint of the petitioner, he is compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings. 2. Having regard to the nature of prayer and order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity to call for reply on behalf of respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Kahol, states that though he has reason to presume and believe that by now action must have been taken pursuant to complaint filed by the petitioner, but in case no steps have been taken, same shall be taken expeditiously. 3. Careful perusal of averments contained in the petition as well as documents annexed therewith, this Court finds that road, as detailed hereinabove, came to be damaged on account of cutting of plots below the road in question by private landlady. Photographs annexed with the petition clearly reveal that road has been completely damaged, as a result of which, local residents of the area, especially school children, are finding it difficult to use the same. In case road is not repaired or restored immediately, there is every likelihood of injury being caused to human lives as well as other properties situate in the vicinity of the road. 3 4. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the same with a direction to the Deputy Commissioner, Solan, to take appropriate action in accordance with law on the complaint made by the petitioner, preferably within a period of one month. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority, while taking decision/issuing directions to appropriate authorities for restoration of road in question, would also afford an opportunity of hearing to other stakeholders, especially the landlady who has allegedly done the unscientific plotting of land situate below the road in question. Petition stands disposed of along with pending application(s), if any September 16, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge