IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.1432 of 2025 Date of Decision: 20.12.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Rakesh Kumar & Ors. ……...Petitioners Versus Sh. Rakesh Kanwar & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: Mr. Kush Sharma, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Assistant Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of instant Contempt Petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioners for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for their having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the directions contained in the order/judgment dated 22.09.2025, rendered in CWP No.15224 of 2025, titled as Rakesh Kumar & others Vs. State of H.P. & others, whereby Coordinate Bench of this Court, while disposing the writ petition filed by the petitioners, directed the respondent No.2 to consider and decide the case of the petitioners-State in accordance with judgment passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No.1638 of 2024, titled as Mohit Sharma and another Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others and in CWP No.15574 of 2024, titled as Vijay Rana & others Vs. State of H.P & others within eight weeks. Since despite there 2 being aforesaid direction, no steps, whatsoever, came to be taken at the behest of the respondents for doing the needful, petitioners have approached this Court in the instant proceedings. 2. Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, learned Additional Advocate General, while accepting notice on behalf of the respondents, states that though he has every reason to believe and 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 learned Additional Advocate General, this Court sees no reason to keep the present petition alive and accordingly, same is closed. However, respondents are directed to do the needful in terms of judgment, alleged to have been violated within a period of two 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 official. December 20, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (Sunil) Judge