IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.2037 of 2026 Decided on: 24.02.2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mohan Singh Chauhan …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Ors .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Servedaman Rathore, 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 the respondents. 2. In view of nature of the grievances raised in the writ petition and the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, reply of the writ petition is not required to be called from the respondents. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. 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 “(ii) After perusal of the same, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to decide the Representations dated 05.03.2019, 18.09.2019, 07.07.2020, 16.10.2024, 29.11.2024, 11.09.2024 and 18.12.2025 of the Petitioner (Annexure P-1) and further directing the Respondents to initiate acquisition proceedings and compensate the petitioner adequately for all the loss and damage. iii) With a consequential relief for the issuance of directions to the respondents to compensate the petitioner adequately for the loss and damage caused to the petitioner.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied in case the respondents/competent authority is directed to consider and decide the representations [Annexures P-2 (colly)] preferred by him, in accordance with law within a fixed- time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 5. 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 respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioner in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 3 Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua February 24, 2026 Judge R.Atal