IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL P RADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.410 of 2025 Date of Decision: 06.05.2025 __________________________________________________________________________ Deepshikha and Others ……...Petitioners Versus Ashish Kumar Kohli …....Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: Mr. Sunil Kumar Kaundal, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General. _________________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of present contempt petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioners for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent for his having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the directions contained in order/judgment dated 09.04.2024, rendered in CWP No.3026 of 2024, whereby Coordinate Bench of this Court passed the following order: “6. Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the case of the petitioners within eight weeks from today strictly in terms of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court on on 27th July, 2015 in CWP No. 1364 of 2015, titled as Poonam Kumari vs. State of H.P. & Anr., and on 31st August, 2022, in CWP No. 342 of 2021 along with connected matters, titled as Yashwant Singh & Ors. vs. State of H.P. & Ors. by passing a detailed and reasoned order. Needless to say that in case the petitioner is found entitled to the benefits of aforesaid judgment, they shall be granted all similar benefits as have been granted to the beneficiaries of judgment passed in 2 aforementioned cases within six weeks thereafter. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.” 2. Since despite there being aforesaid direction, no steps, whatsoever, came to be taken at the behest of the respondent for doing the needful, petitioners have approached this Court in the instant proceedings. 3. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional 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. 4. Consequently, in view of the fair stand adopted by the learned Additional 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 petitioners would be at liberty to get the present petition revived, so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken against the erring officials. May 06, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (Rajeev Raturi) Judge