IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.1232 of 2025 Decided on: 7th January, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nirdosh Pathania …..Petitioner Versus Sh. Rakesh Kanwar and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Vikas Rajput, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioner alleges violation of Nirdosh Pathania Versus State of H.P. & Anr.2. Operative portion of the decision reads as under:- “4. Having regard to above submissions but without examining the merits of the matter, this petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgments and pass appropriate order(s) in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The decision so arrived at, shall be communicated to the petitioners.” 2. In the aforesaid decision, directions were issued to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in light of the decision rendered in Laiq Ram Sharma and another Versus State of H.P. and another3, as affirmed in 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes 2 CWP No.968 of 2024, decided on 04.08.2025 3 CWP No.7526 of 2021, decided alongwith connected matters on 17.10.2023 2 State of H.P. & Anr. vs. Laiq Ram Sharma & Anr.4 and The State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. Versus Laiq Ram Sharma & Ors.5. 3. Respondents have filed the compliance affidavit, as per which, the respondents have considered the case of the petitioner alongwith others including Sh. Laiq Ram Sharma, who was the lead petitioner in Laiq Ram Sharma3 and rejected the same under office order dated 03.01.2026. Copy of the said office order has also been appended alongwith the compliance affidavit. In view of the office order issued by the respondents on 03.01.2026, considering and rejecting the case of the petitioner as also that of Sh. Laiq Ram Sharma, the present contempt proceedings are closed. Notices issued to the respondents are discharged. Liberty is, however, reserved to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy in accordance with law for the redressal of his surviving grievances including against the consideration order passed by the respondents. Jyotsna Rewal Dua January 07, 2026 Judge Mukesh 4 LPA No.311 of 2024, decided alongwith connected matters on 09.01.2025 5 Special Leave to Appeal(C) No(s).8418-8420/2025, decided on 27.03.2025