IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.146 of 2025 Date of Decision: 19.03.2025 _______________________________________________________ Bidhi Singh …….Petitioner Versus Rohan Chand Thakur& another … Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Proxy counsel vice Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. Lalita Sharma, Proxy Counsel vice Mr. Deepak Sharma, Advocate. _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant contempt petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for their having intentionally and deliberately disobeyed the mandate contained in order dated 24.10.2024 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 10646 of 2024, titled Bidhi Singh vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation and another. 2. Careful perusal of aforesaid order, alleged to have been violated, reveals that Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, while disposing of the petition, directed the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner within a period of six weeks. Since, despite there 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 being specific direction to do the needful, as taken note above, respondents failed to do the needful in terms of aforesaid judgment, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings. 3. Ms. Lalita Sharma, learned proxy counsel representing the respondents, states that though she has every reason to believe and presume that by now aforesaid judgment/ order alleged to have been violated, must have been complied with, but if not, same would be complied with within a period of three weeks from today. 4. Consequently, in view of the fair statement made by learned proxy counsel representing the respondents, this Court sees no reason to keep the present proceedings alive and accordingly, same are closed with the direction to the respondents to do the needful in terms of order dated 24.10.2024 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court positively within a period of three weeks, if not already done, failing which, they would further aggravate the contempt. Petitioner is at liberty to get the present proceedings revived in case aforesaid order is not complied with, so that appropriate action, in accordance with law is taken against the erring officials. Notices issued to the respondents are hereby discharged accordingly. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge March 19,2025 (shankar)