IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No. 861 of 2025 Date of Decision: 13.8.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Dilip Kumar ……...Petitioner Versus Ashish Kohli …....Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General with 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 respondent for his having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the directions contained in order/judgment dated 30.4.2025 passed in CWP No. 3137of 2025, titled as Dilip Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Anr., whereby this Court disposed of the petition with direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in light of judgment dated 29.11.2024, passed in CWP No. 1638 of 2024, titled as Mohit Sharma and Anr. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., within four weeks. 2 Since despite repeated requests, aforesaid direction never came to be complied with, petitioner is compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings. 2. Mr. B.C Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, 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 Additional Advocate General, this Court sees no reason to keep the present petition alive and accordingly, same is closed. However, respondent- contemnor is directed to do the needful in terms of judgment alleged to have been violated within a period of three weeks, failing which he 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. August 13, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge