1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 8120 of 2026 Decided on: 21.05.2026 Kashmir Singh …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P & others ..Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Lal Singh Mehta, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 to 4. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice confined to respondent No.1 to 4 which is waived by Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General. In view of grievance of the petitioner, the pleadings, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the order being passed hereinafter, notice is not required to be issued to respondent No.5. Reply is also not required to be called from respondents No. 1 to 4. Matter has accordingly been heard at this stage. 2. This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs:- 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 “(i) That writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondents to demarcate the land comprised in Khasra Nos. 748, 763, 764, 1108 & 1109, situated in Mohal Dohak, Patwar Circle, Mandali, Sub-Tehsil Bihru Kalan, District Una, H.P. and to remove all illegal encroachments from the aforesaid Government/Panchayat land and restore the public path for use by the villager, in accordance with law. (ii) Direct the respondents to take time bound action against the encroachers in accordance with law; (iii) Issue appropriate directions for fixing responsibility upon erring officials for their inaction and failure to discharge statutory duties.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been representing to respondents No. 1 to 4 for the redressal of his grievance raised in this writ petition seeking action against the encroachers on the government land and also the land belonging to the Panchayat but without any success. Representations appended at Annexures P-2 to P-5 preferred by the petitioner were not responded to at all by Competent Authorities. The petitioner thereafter preferred comprehensive representation on 24.09.2025 (Annexure P-7). Even this did not elicit any response from the Competent Authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner would be satisfied in case respondent No.2/Competent Authority is directed to consider latest representation of the petitioner preferred 3 on 24.09.2025 (Annexure P-7) and decide the same in accordance with law. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, 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, decide and take appropriate call on representation of the petitioner dated 24.09.2025 (Annexure P-7) in accordance with law within a period of eight 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 May 21, 2026 Judge yogesh