Sunder Singh vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 618 HP

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA




                                                                         .
                                            CWP No. 507 of 2021





                                 Date of Decision 18.01.2021
_________________________________________________________________





Sunder Singh                                         ....Petitioner

                              Vs.
State of Himachal Pradesh and others                                  ....Respondents





Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara, Judge
Whether approved for reporting?1

For the petitioner:                  Mr. Suneet Goel, Advocate.

For the respondents:                Mr.    Bhupender    Thakur,   Deputy
                                    Advocate General, with Mr. Rajat
                                    Chauhan, Law Officer, for the


                                    respondents No. 1,to 3 and 5 to 9-
                                    State.
                                    Mr. Ajeet Singh Saklani, Advocate, for
                                    respondent No. 4.




                                    Through Video Conferencing





Anoop Chitkara, Judge (Oral):

Notice. Mr. Bhupender Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate

General and Mr. Ajeet Singh Saklani, learned Standing Counsel,

appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3

& 5 to 9 and 4, respectively.

The petitioner who is a public spirited person, has come

up before this Court seeking direction to the concerned respondents

1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?

for their inaction in getting the encroachment removed despite the

.

directions of various authorities including that of National Green

Tribunal.

2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the

nature of the order, this Court is proposing to pass, would not require

any reply. The main grievance is that had the authorities acted upon

the representations made by the petitioner, then the stage for him to

approach this Court would not have arisen at all.

3.

Given above, the concerned respondents are directed to

decide all the representations and annexures, as mentioned in this

writ petition, pending before them, within four weeks from today and

take appropriate action in accordance with law. Liberty is reserved to

the petitioner to approach this Court again in case there is any

grievance. In the noting sheet of the officers, who will deal with this

matter, shall specifically mention the date and time so that this Court

is able to fix the responsibility for non-compliance of this Order.

The petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also

the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.

(Anoop Chitkara) Vacation Judge January 18, 2021 (R.Atal)