IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.898 of 2025 Date of Decision: 26.8.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Dalbir Singh ……...Petitioner Versus Rakesh Kanwar and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Ms. Akriti Rana, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) While placing on record communication dated 25.8.2025, enclosing therewith copy of order dated nil, passed by Director of School Education, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General, states that respondents after having considered case of the petitioner in terms of mandate contained in the judgment alleged to have been violated, have considered and rejected the representation of the petitioner. Since there was only direction to consider representation of the petitioner and respondents have considered and rejected the case of the petitioner, no action of the respondents can be said to be contumacious. 2 2. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court finds no merit in the present petition and accordingly same is dismissed. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file substantive petition before appropriate court of law laying therein challenge to order passed in purported compliance of the judgment alleged to have been violated. August 26, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge