1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 3194 of 2011-D Decided on: 5.12.2011 Devinder Kumar & another ....Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & others ....Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. For the petitioners : Mr. Lalit Kumar Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Additional Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General for respondents No. 1 to 4. Respondent No. 5 in person. Mr. G.R. Palsra, Advocate, for respondent No. 6. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayers: “ (i) That the action of the respondent No. 4, who is not permitting the respondent No. 5 to organize the Kuthah Fair Thunag which is going to be convened w.e.f. 22nd May, 2011 to 30th May, 2011 may kindly be set-aside and quashed and the respondents No. 3 2 and 4 may kindly be directed to direct the respondent No. 5 to organize the annual fair of 'Shree Brahmdev Tungasi Devta” at Kuthah, Tehsil Thunag, District Mandi in terms of the directions issued by the respondent No. 1 forthwith. (ii) That the respondent No. 6 may be restrained to interfere with the functioning of respondent No. 5 in organizing the fair in question. (iii) That the respondents may be directed to extent the benefit flow from Annexure P-3 to respondent No. 5.” 2. Learned Additional Advocate General invited reference to the following order passed by this Court in CWP No. 317 of 2011, dated 27.2.2003:- “In view of these facts and circumstances on record, no order is required to be passed in this writ petition save and except that while constituting the committees for organizing the annul fair of Shree Barhmdev Tungsi Devta in future, the religious feelings of the Deity and the local people will be taken into consideration by the competent authorities and the people connected with the affairs of Shree Brahmdev Tungsi Devta will be given due representation in the committees. The writ petition is disposed of.” 3 3. It is the submission of the petitioners that in view of Annexure P-3, direction issued by the Government that such 'Melas' are to be organized at the Panchayat level, the matter requires re-consideration. It is certainly open to the petitioners to approach the Government, in which case, the Government, in view of the change of the policy, will look into the matter, with notice to the affected parties, as above. Needless to say that the order, referred to above, shall not stand in the way of fresh consideration, since the decision has been taken by the Government. 4. The writ petition is disposed of, as above, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. December 5, 2011 (Justice Dev Darshan Sud), (ms/hl) Judge.