Shimla, April 23 (UNI) In the long-standing litigation surrounding the iconic Wildflower Hall Hotel, the Himachal Pradesh High Court, through a detailed order by Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, imposed a penalty of ₹50,000 on the principal secretary (tourism & civil aviation) to the state government.

The fine was levied for misleading the court and attempting to backtrack on a statement made by the state’s top law officer, the advocate general, during open court proceedings.

The matter pertains to the execution of an arbitral award dated July 23, 2005 and subsequent court orders, concerning the transfer of shares and possession of the heritage Wildflower Hall property. The case has seen prolonged proceedings with multiple adjournments, often on the request of both the state and EIH Ltd., one of the primary stakeholders, citing ongoing efforts at settlement.

A crucial hearing held on March 27 witnessed the advocate general unequivocally submitting that the state was agreeable to the transfer of shares by EIH Ltd. post the decision of OMP Nos. 94 & 851 of 2024, which are under active consideration. This position was recorded by the court in the presence of senior counsels and during proceedings that were attended both physically and through video conferencing.

However, a subsequent application, supported by an affidavit from the principal secretary (tourism), attempted to label the advocate general’s recorded statement as "inadvertent" and not reflective of the state’s stand. This act drew severe criticism from the Court.

Justice Dua, in a strongly worded order, dismissed the application, terming it a “misdirected & disrespectful adventure” that not only undermined the authority of the advocate general but also amounted to interference in the administration of justice.

The judge noted that the advocate general had reiterated in court that his March 27 statement was made under definitive instructions from the government and stood by it fully.

Citing constitutional provisions and past judgments, the court emphasized the exalted status of the advocate general, who is the highest law officer of the state, and whose statements in court are made with full responsibility and legal consequence.

Calling the application an act bordering on contempt, Justice Dua ordered the principal secretary to personally bear the cost of ₹50,000, to be deposited with the office of the advocate general before the next hearing.

The judge also allowed the advocate general to reserve his right to seek further legal remedy, including contempt proceedings against the officer.

The matter, which has national interest given the high-profile nature of the Wildflower Hall Hotel and the involvement of corporate giant EIH Ltd., is now scheduled for continuation of arguments on April 25.

This episode marks yet another dramatic turn in the saga of the historic hilltop property, once frequented by British officials and now at the centre of a high-stakes legal battle over control, valuation, and future use.

UNI ML PRS