Himachal Pradesh High Court

CWP/13044/2026 of SAVITRI DEVI Vs NHAI AND OTHERS on 15 September 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.13044 of 2026 Date of Decision: 15.09.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Smt. Savitri Devi ……...Petitioner Versus NHAI & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.13044 of 2026

Date of Decision: 15.09.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Smt. Savitri Devi

……...Petitioner

Versus

NHAI & Ors.

…....Respondents

Coram

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Ms. Deepmala Sharma, Advocate.

For the respondents: Mr. Karan Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.1.

Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for respondents No.2 & 3. ___________________________________________________________________________

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

Though short reply on behalf of respondent No. 1 stands filed, but learned counsel representing the petitioner states that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case direction is issued to respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the pending representation dated 29.05.2026 (Annexure P-4) in a time-bound manner.

2. Learned counsel representing the respondents are not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner.

3. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the same

2 with a direction to respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass appropriate orders. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(Sandeep Sharma )

Judge September 15, 2026

(sunil)

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead