Petitioner sought a direction for NHAI to expedite a pending representation. The Court ordered Respondent No.2 to decide it within four weeks without adjudicating merits.
Respondent No.2 to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner within four weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
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.
……...Petitioner Versus …....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
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)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the pending representation should be considered and decided in a time-bound manner.
Savitri Devi
NHAI
Respondent No.2
Respondent No.3
Sandeep Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
