2025:HHC:1101 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.946 of 2024 Date of Decision: 06.01.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Babita Thakur & Ors. ……...Petitioners Versus Ashish Kumar Kohli & Anr. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Ms. Salochna Rana, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of instant Contempt Petition, prayer has been made on behalf of petitioners for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for their having not complied with the mandate contained in the judgment dated 30.08.2024 passed by this Court in CWP No. 9005 of 2024 titled as Babita Thakur and Ors. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., whereby direction came to be issued to the competent authority to decide the representation Annexure P-3 (colly) filed by the petitioners, in the light of the averments made therein, by passing speaking order, within a period of four weeks. Since despite repeated requests, aforesaid direction never 2 2025:HHC:1101 came to be complied with, petitioners are compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings. 2. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the respondents, 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, respondents-contemnors are directed to do the needful in terms of judgment alleged to have been violated within a period of three weeks from today, failing which they 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. January 06, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge