IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.50 of 2025 Date of Decision: 27.2.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Ranjeet Singh ……...Petitioner Versus Shri Rakesh Kanwar …....Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Raj Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondent: 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) By way of present contempt petition, prayer has been made by the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent for his having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the mandate contained in order/judgment dated 10.4.2024, rendered by Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No.3058 of 2024 titled Ranjeet Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., whereby a direction came to be issued to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in light of judgments passed in CWP No. 3341 of 2019, titled Madan Lal v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. and CWPOA No. 6582 of 2019, titled Prem Sukh v. State 2 of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., which have otherwise attained finality. Since despite repeated requests, needful was not done by the respondent, petitioner was compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings. 2. Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General while putting in appearance on behalf of the respondent states that pursuant to directions contained in the judgment alleged to have been violated, case of the petitioner was considered in light of afore judgments and thereafter he has been granted the benefits in terms of Madan Lal and Prem Sukh (supra). To substantiate his aforesaid claim, Mr. Panwar placed on record communication dated 26.2.2025, issued under the signature of Director (Elementary Education) as well as copy of order dated 25.2.2025, issued by the Deputy Director (Elementary Education), which are taken on record. Perusal of order dated 25.2.2025, clearly reveals that after examining the case of the petitioner, department of Education found him similarly situate to Madan Lal and Prem Sukh (supra) and accordingly, directed the concerned Principal/Head Master to release monetary benefits in terms of instructions issued by the Finance Department vide letter dated 15.12.2011. 3 3. Consequently, in view of the above, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant proceedings and accordingly same are closed reserving liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings before appropriate court of law qua surviving grievances. February 27, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge