IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL P RADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.927 of 2025 Date of Decision: 03.09.2025 __________________________________________________________________________ Pratap Singh and Others ……...Petitioners Versus Ashish Kohli …....Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with 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 copy of office order dated 02.09.2025, issued under the signatures of Director, School Education, passed in purported compliance of mandate contained in the judgment, alleged to have been violated, learned Additional Advocate General states that in terms of directions contained in the judgment, alleged to have been violated, respondent after having considered the representation of the petitioners in light of CWP No.8148 of 2022, tilted as Yashwant Kumar Vs. State of H.P. and Others, has rejected their case. Since there was only direction to consider the case of the petitioners in light of Yashwant Kumar (supra), no action of respondent can be said to be contumacious. 2. In view of the above, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant proceedings and accordingly the same are closed. Notice is 2 discharged. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioners to file appropriate proceedings in the appropriate Court of law, laying therein challenge to order passed in purported compliance of mandate contained in the judgment, alleged to have been violated, if so advised. September 03, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (Rajeev Raturi) Judge