IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.17029 of 2026 Date of Decision: 28.09.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Leela Dass Mehta ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Ashwani Chawla, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for the respondents- State. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Ashwani Chawla, learned counsel for petitioner, is that despite there being no justification, installment on account of special relief package has not been released to petitioner, as a result thereof, great prejudice is being caused to him. 2. Carful perusal of averments contained in the petition, which are duly supported by an affidavit, reveal that a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- was sanctioned in favour of petitioner on account of damage caused to his house during rainy season 2023. Though two installments already stand released, but till date, third installment has not been released. 3. Careful perusal of communication issued by Deputy Commissioner, Shimla reveals that a sum of Rs. 1,15,00,000/- 2 remains available for utilization/disbursement under special relief package, but since name of the petitioner was erroneously not included in the list of persons, who were to be released third installment, needful was not done. Now, name of the petitioner stands included in the list of left-out beneficiaries at serial No. 1, but yet amount is not being released and hence, the petitioner is compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings. 4. Having regard to the nature of prayer and order proposed to be passed in the instant proceedings, this Court sees no necessity to call for reply from the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Anish Banshtu, learned Deputy Advocate General. Since it is not in dispute that petitioner is covered under special relief package, coupled with the fact that two installments already stand released in his favour, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the same with a direction to Deputy Commissioner Shimla to ensure that third installment is also released to the petitioner, if there is no other legal impediment, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of two weeks from today. 5. The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms, along with all pending applications. (Sandeep Sharma ) Judge September 28, 2026 (sunil)