Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6761 (HP)

GIAN CHAND v. ROHAN CHAND THAKUR AND ANR

COPC/158/2025 · 2025-03-20

Sandeep Sharma

Contempt Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.158 of 2025 Date of Decision: 20.3.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Gian Chand ……...Petitioner Versus Rohan Chand Thakur and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Deepak Sharma, Advocate. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of present contempt petition, prayer has been made by the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for their having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the directions contained in order/judgment dated 23.10.2024, rendered in CWP No. 10033 of 2024 (Gian Chand v. HRTC and Anr.), whereby coordinate Bench of this Court disposed of the petition with direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner within six weeks. Since despite repeated requests, aforesaid direction never came to be complied with, petitioner is compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings. 2 2. Mr. Deepak Sharma, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondents, 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 eight weeks from today. 3. Consequently, in view of the fair stand adopted by the learned counsel or the respondents, this Court sees no reason to keep the present petition alive and accordingly, same is closed. However, respondents- contemnors are directed to do the needful in terms of judgment alleged to have been violated within a period of eight weeks, failing which they 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. March 20, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge