2026:HHC:3299 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMP(M) No.2007 of 2025 in Review Petition No.01 of 2026 Decided on: 02.01.2026. ________________________________________________________ Tilak Raj & Others ...Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh ...Respondents & Others Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting?. For the petitioners: Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Amit Kumar Chaudhary, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents-State. Ranjan Sharma, Judge [Oral] Instant application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with enabling provisions seeking condonation of delay in filing the accompanying Review Petition; whereby CWPOA No.6402 of 2020, titled Tilak Raj & Others versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Another was disposed of as infructuous on 24.07.2025 the basis of a Statement made by Learned Counsel. 2. Perusal of the application indicates that CWPOA No.6402 of 2020 was disposed of as 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2026:HHC:3299 - 2 - Infructuous on 24.07.2025 on the basis of a mistaken statement given by Learned Counsel. It is averred that at the instance of the petitioner, the accompanying Review Petition along with application for delay has been filed as the petitioner states that the matter requires to be heard, on merits. 3. Upon issuance of notice on this application, the non-applicant/State Authorities have opposed the prayer for condonation of delay, on the ground, that petitioner cannot re-agitate a settled issue, under the garb of a Review Petition. It is further averred that the petitioner has failed to act with due diligence. It is in this backdrop, the application has been opposed by the non- applicant/State Authorities. 4. Taking into account the entirety of the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered view, that once the CWPOA No.6402 of 2020 was disposed of as infructuous on the mistaken statement made by Learned Counsel for the petitioner but once the petitioner-litigant on realizing the passing of the order rushed for filing 2026:HHC:3299 - 3 - the Review, therefore, in these circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that a litigant should not suffer for the incorrect statement or mis- statement made by Counsel concerned. 5. Even the objection raised by Learned State Counsel that matters which have already been settled cannot be unsettled is misconceived, for the reason, that the claims raised in the main matter, are yet to be adjudicated upon, by the Court and the State Authorities cannot infer that the decision of the main petition shall result in unsettling the settled issues, at this stage. 6. In view of the above discussion and in order to maintain a balance between the rights of the petitioner and the interests of the State, the order dated 24.07.2025 is recalled and CWPOA No.6402 of 2020 is restored to its original number and status, after condoning the nominal delay in peculiar-fact situation of instant case. Accordingly, the application seeking condonation of delay in filing accompanying Review Petition stand disposed of in aforesaid terms, and 2026:HHC:3299 - 4 - CWPOA No.3402 of 2020 be listed on re-opening of Courts after winter vacation on 02.03.2026. (Ranjan Sharma) Judge January 02, 2026 [Shivender]