2025:HHC:14469 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No. 869 of 2024 Decided on: 19.05.2025 Rajeev Kaundal and others .…Petitioners Versus Sh. Rakesh Kanwar and another …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : M/s Prem Prakash Chauhan and Tara Devi, Advocates. For the respondents : Mr. Rajpal Thakur, Additional Advocate General. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioners allege willful disobedience of the directions passed by this Court in CWP No. 9061 of 2022, titled as Rajeev Kaundal and others vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, which was decided on 28.08.2024, in the following terms:- “As the prayer so made is innocuous one, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, this petition is disposed of with the direction that the case of the petitioners be considered in light of the adjudication made by Hon’ble Division Bench in the case mentioned hereinabove within a period of eight weeks from today, by adhering to the principles of natural justice. Pending 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:14469 miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.” 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that after the judgment was passed by the Court, the respondents-competent Authority passed an order Annexure C-2, dated 03.10.2024 and despite holding that the petitioner was entitled for deemed regularization w.e.f. 01.05.2003 alongwith consequential benefits subject to the final outcome of the SLP mentioned therein, till date, consequential benefits have not been paid to the petitioner. 3. This Court is of considered view that as the direction passed by the Court was of consideration and consequent thereto, an office order has been passed by the Authority concerned, as far as the judgment is concerned, it stands complied with. In case, according to the petitioner, certain benefits to which they are entitled to, are not released to them by the respondents, then the petitioners would be well advised to file a fresh petition in this regard. Faced with this situation, Mr. Prem P. Chauhan, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that then these proceedings be closed but with liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh petition. Ordered accordingly. These proceedings are accordingly closed with liberty as prayed for. Notice discharged. (Ajay Mohan Goel) May 19, 2025 Judge (narender)