2026:HHC:41047 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16705 of 2026 Date of Decision: 24.09.2026 _______________________________________________________ Inder Bhag …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Naveen K. Dass, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, fairly states that the petitioner would be content and satisfied in case he is permitted to make a representation to the competent authority seeking therein regularization of the land allegedly encroached upon by him. 2. Though, having taken note of the fact that eviction order already stands passed against the petitioner by the competent authority, there appears to be no justification to accede to aforesaid request made by the petitioner. However, having regard to the fact that the Hon'ble Apex Court, in Special Leave Petition (Civil) 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:41047 No.12300 of 2026, titled State of Himachal Pradesh and others vs. Punam Gupta and others, has directed the parties to maintain status quo with regard to the suit in that case, which is stated to be akin to the property involved in the present proceedings, this Court deems it fit to dispose of the present petition, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file representation to the competent authority, within a period of two weeks, praying therein for regularization of the land, which in turn, shall be decided by the competent authority within a period of four weeks, in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly. Till the disposal of the representation, if any, filed by the petitioner, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner in terms of order impugned in the instant proceedings (Annexure P-4).Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge September 24 ,2026 (shankar)