IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.551 of 2025 Date of Decision: 5.6.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Meena Kumari Sharma ……...Petitioner Versus Rakesh Kanwar and Anr. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Ms. Aafreen Kaushal, Advocate vice Mr. Vishwa Bhushan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of present contempt petition, prayer has been made by the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for their having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the directions contained in order/judgment dated 16.5.2025, passed in CWP No. 8101 of 2025 (Meena Kumari Sharma v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Anr.), whereby direction was issued to the respondents to consider and decide representation of the petitioner within one week. 2 2. Before reply, if any, could be called for from the respondents, Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, made available communication dated 4.6.2025, issued under the signature of Director (Elementary Education), perusal whereof clearly reveals that petitioner failed to file representation within three days of passing of the order alleged to have been violated and as such, needful could not be done within the stipulated time. 3. It also emerges from the afore communication that as per information received from the Deputy Director (Elementary Education), Mandi vide letter dated 4.6.2025, personal hearing of the petitioner has been fixed in the office on 5.6.2025 at 11:00AM. 4. Though it has been seriously disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner had not filed representation within time. Ms. Kaushal, further states that as per instructions imparted to her, representation was filed on 19.6.2025 i.e. within three days of order passed by this court. She further states that petitioner herein shall make herself available before the Deputy Director (Elementary Education) on 5.6.2025 at 11:00AM. 5. Consequently, in view of the above, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant proceedings and accordingly, same are closed 3 with direction to the Deputy Director (Elementary Education), Mandi to decide representation of the petitioner after affording opportunity of hearing, taking note of the transfer policy as well as observations made in the order alleged to have been violated and thereafter, appropriate orders may be passed. Till the time, representation filed by the petitioner is decided, she shall not be compelled to join at the transferred station. June 5, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge