1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3123 of 2026 Decided on: 17.03.2026 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- M/s Doon Cashew Husk Product …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Nitin Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of respondents. In view of nature of grievances raised by the petitioner and the order being passed hereinafter, reply from the appearing respondents is not required to be called for. The matter has accordingly been heard at this stage. 2. This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs:- “(i) Issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner regarding grant of NOC to transport ‘Katha’ and ‘Kutch’ 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 manufactured from cashew husk is concerned by the unit of the petitioner; and (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents not to impose transit permit/pass fees upon ‘katha’ and ‘kutchh’ manufactured from cashew husk is concerned by the unit of the petitioner.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though respondent-State has issued notification which imposes condition of having transit permit/pass fees per quintal upon ‘katha’ and ‘kutchh’ manufactured from ‘khair’ wood but the same cannot be applied to the petitioner as the petitioner though manufactures ‘katha’ and ‘kutchh’ but not from ‘khair’ wood, it manufactures it from cashew husk. This raw material (cashew husk) is not produced in State of Himachal Pradesh. The petitioner imports cashew husk from outside the State of Himachal Pradesh. Petitioner’s grievance is that respondents are not issuing no objection certificate to the petitioner. Petitioner’s repeated representations preferred in this regard have also not been responded to. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner would be satisfied in case, it is permitted to file fresh representation to respondent No.1 whereafter, the said authority is directed to decide the same in accordance with law within a time bound schedule. This proposal is not objected to by learned Additional Advocate General. 3 4. In view of above submissions but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to file a representation for the redressal of its grievances raised in this writ petition to respondent No.1/Competent Authority within two weeks from today. In case such representation is so made, same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law by respondent No.1/Competent Authority within four weeks thereafter. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua March 17, 2026 Judge yogesh