IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No. 1002 of 2025 Date of Decision: 18.9.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Sh. Nitin Chauhan and Ors. ……...Petitioners Versus Sh. Rakesh Kanwar …....Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: Dr. Lalit Kumar Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent: 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 petitioners for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent for his having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the directions contained in order/judgment dated 16.7.2025 passed in CWP No. 11395 of 2025, titled as Nitin Chauhan and Ors. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., whereby this Court disposed of the petition with direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide case of the petitioners within two weeks in light of judgment dated 23.6.2025 passed in CWP No. 8032 of 2021, titled Vikas Kumar v. State 2 of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. (alongwith connected matters). Since despite repeated requests, aforesaid direction never came to be complied with, petitioners are 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 two weeks, failing which he would aggravate the contempt and petitioners would be at liberty to get the present petition revived so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken against the erring officials. September 18, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge