IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No. 1410 of 2025 Date of Decision: 19.12.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Sh. Sikander Singh ……...Petitioner Versus Er. Anju Sharma …....Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. A.K. Gupta, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates 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 her having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the directions contained in order/judgment dated 25.9.2025 passed in CWP No. 15525 of 2025, titled as Sikander Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., whereby this Court disposed of the petition with direction to the respondents to consider and decide representation of the petitioner, within six weeks. Since despite repeated requests, aforesaid direction never came to be 2 complied with, petitioner is compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings. 2. Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, while waiving notice 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 three 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 three weeks, failing which she 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 officials. December 19, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge