IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.421 of 2025 Date of Decision: 09.05.2025 _______________________________________________________ Naresh Kumar & another …….Petitioners Versus Nipun Jindal & another … Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Narender Singh Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Dixit Sahotra, Advocate vice Mr. Deepak Sharma, Advocate. ___________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant contempt petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioners for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for their having intentionally and deliberately disobeyed the mandate contained in judgment/order dated 29.11.2024 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 14070 of 2024, titled Naresh Kumar and another vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation and another. 2. Careful perusal of aforesaid order/judgment, alleged to have been violated, reveals that Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, while disposing of the petition, directed the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in light of judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWPOA No.2343 of 2020, titled as Vikram Singh versus Himachal Road Transport 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Corporation alongwith connected matters, within a period of six weeks. Since, despite there being specific direction to do the needful, as taken note hereinabove, respondents failed to do the needful, petitioners have approached this Court in the instant proceedings. 3. Mr. Dixit Sahotra, Advocate vice Mr. Deepak Sharma, Advocate, states that though he has every reason to believe and presume that by now aforesaid judgment/ order alleged to have been violated, must have been complied with, but if not, same would be complied with within a period of three weeks from today. 4. Consequently, in view of the fair statement made by learned counsel for the respondents, this Court sees no reason to keep the present proceedings alive and accordingly, same are closed with the direction to the respondent to do the needful in terms of judgment/order dated 29.11.2024, positively within a period of three weeks, if not already done, failing which, they would further aggravate the contempt. Petitioners are at liberty to get the present proceedings revived in case aforesaid judgment is not complied with, so that appropriate action, in accordance with law, is taken against the erring officials. Notices issued to the respondents are hereby discharged accordingly. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge May 09,2025 (shankar)