IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.545 of 2025 Date of Decision: 16.06.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Chanchal Joshi ……...Petitioner Versus Nipun Jindal & Anr. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Rahul Thakur, Advocate. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of present contempt petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for their having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the directions contained in order/judgment dated 20.03.2025, rendered in CWP No.3916 of 2025, whereby Coordinate Bench of this Court, while disposing of the petition, directed the respondents to pay due and admissible dearness relief to the petitioner in terms of office memorandums dated 07.02.2015 and 07.03.2020 within a period of six weeks and if admissible dearness relief is not paid by the respondents to the petitioner within aforesaid period, then the same shall be payable with interest @ 5% per annum from the due date till its actual realization. Since despite there being 2 aforesaid direction, no steps, whatsoever, came to be taken at the behest of the respondents for doing the needful, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings. 2. Mr. Rahul Thakur, Advocate, while putting in appearance on behalf of respondents, submits that though he has every reason to presume that by now, judgment alleged to have been violated must have been complied with in its totality, but if not, same would be positively complied with within a period of three weeks from today. 3. Consequently, in view of the fair stand adopted by the learned counsel representing the respondents, this Court sees no reason to keep the present petition alive and accordingly, same is closed. However, respondents-contemnors are directed to do the needful in terms of judgment alleged to have been violated within a period of three weeks from today, failing which they would aggravate the contempt and petitioner would be at liberty to get the present petition revived, so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken against the erring officials. June 16, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (Sunil) Judge