JUDGMENT Sureshwar Thakur, J. - Though, Mr. Mehar Chand, the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of respondents No. 5 and 6, submits that, the lis, engaging the writ Court, is, similar to the one, which earlier engaged the learned Civil Court concerned, and also, though he further submits that, upon the previous lis, a conclusive and binding verdict, as embodied in Annexure R-1, becoming pronounced, and, whereupon, the endeavor of the writ petitioner, to, seek reversal, of, the conclusive and binding decree, made by the learned Civil Court concerned, cannot be accepted. 2. Though, through the afore verdict, the learned counsel for the afore private respondents, seeks to attract the bar, of, the principle of res judicata, against the extant writ petition. However, a prima facie perusal of the memo of parties, borne in Annexure R-1, discloses that, there is no apt commonality or similarity, inter se the parties therein, and the parties to the extant writ petition, and also there is no commonality inter se the Khasra number, mentioned in the extant writ petition, and, in the earlier litigation. In aftermath, the afore estopping principle remains unattracted, vis--vis, the extant writ petition. However, at this stage, the learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner, draws the attention of this Court, to, an echoing, borne in Annexure R-1, wherein, the writ khasra No. 212, becomes reflected to be owned by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, and, it also carries the description, of, "Gair Mumkin Raasta", whereupon, an endeavor is made, by the writ petitioner, to, carry repairs of the existing thereon road. 3. The learned counsel, appearing on behalf, of the private respondents, does not dispute, the veracity of the afore submissions. The sequel of the afore is that, the afore made submissions, by the learned counsel, for the private respondents, for, estopping the hereat endeavour, of, the writ petitioner, hence on the principle of constructive res judicata, and, arising from the mandate of the learned Civil Court, borne in Annexure R-1, rather becoming stripped of its vigor. The sequel of the afore is that, the afore made submissions, by the learned counsel, for the private respondents, for, estopping the hereat endeavour, of, the writ petitioner, hence on the principle of constructive res judicata, and, arising from the mandate of the learned Civil Court, borne in Annexure R-1, rather becoming stripped of its vigor. The further sequel thereof is that, the State of Himachal Pradesh, becoming encumbered, with, a, constitutional obligation, to, ensure the providing, of, the facility of road, to the writ petitioner, and, even if, there is/are lands of private owners, existing, and, adjunct to writ khasra number 212, thereupon, the Collector concerned, is, directed to, within ten days hereafter, ensure that the apposite repairs of the road concerned, shall be positively effected, only within the dimensions, of, writ Khasra No. 212, and not there beyond(s). 4. In view of the above, the extant writ petition is disposed of, so also pending applications, if any.