1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.2194 of 2026 Decided on: 11.03.2026 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kamla Devi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. R.L.Chaudhary, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive relief:- “(i) That writ of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondent No.2 to decide the representation dated 19.12.2025 (Annexure P-4) made by the petitioner, within a time bound manner and remove the encroachment of the private respondent No.4 from the Government land measuring 17-10-09 bighas, bearing Khasra No.1147/628, situated in Mohal Kalhod,Tehsil Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P.” 2. Heard and considered the case file. 3. Record shows that petitioner had previously instituted Kamla Devi versus State of Himachal 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 Pradesh and others2. The said writ petition was decided as under:- “As prayed for, this petition is allowed to be withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Authorities concerned afresh and in case, the Authorities do not do the needful within some reasonable time, the petitioner may approach the Court, in accordance with law. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.” Pursuant to the liberty reserved to her in terms of Kamla Devi,2 petitioner thereafter, preferred a representation on 19.12.2025 (Annexure P-4). Her grievance is that respondents have not decided the said representation. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied in case the respondent No.2/competent authority(s) is directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Keeping in view above but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-4) in accordance with law within a 2 CWP No.16762/2025, decided on 03.12.2025. 3 period of six weeks from today. 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 11, 2026 Judge yogesh