2025:HHC:3861 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL P RADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.55 of 2025 Date of Decision: 28.02.2025 __________________________________________________________________________ Jai Gopal Sharma ……...Petitioner Versus 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. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. _________________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of present contempt petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent for his having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the directions contained in order/judgment dated 28.03.2024, rendered in CWP No.2615 of 2024, whereby Coordinate Bench of this Court disposed of the petition with direction to respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in light of judgment passed in CWP No.3341 of 2019, titled Madan Lal Vs. State of H.P. and Others and CWPOA No.6582 of 2019, titled as Prem Sukh Vs. State of H.P. and Others, within eight weeks by passing a speaking order. Since despite there being aforesaid direction, no steps, whatsoever, came to be taken at the behest of the respondent for doing the needful, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings. 2025:HHC:3861 2 2. Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondent, 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 two weeks from today. 3. Consequently, in view of the fair stand adopted by the learned Deputy 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 petitioner would be at liberty to get the present petition revived, so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken against the erring official. February 28, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (Rajeev Raturi) Judge