IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA COPC No.594 of 2026 Decided on: 15.06.2026 _________________________________________________________________ Neelama Devi ....Petitioner Versus Rajesh Sharma and Ors. …Respondent _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Jeevan Kumar, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, Assistant Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 to 9. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Following order was passed in this petition on 15.05.2026:- “Notice confined to respondents No. 1 to 9 which is waived by learned Additional Advocate General. Let reply/ compliance affidavit be filed within two weeks on the affidavit of respondent No.3 in view of allegations levelled in the petition about respondent No.3 having breached his assurances on the basis of which, CWP No. 2875/2026 (Neelama Devi versus State of H.P. and others) was disposed of on 18.03.2026. List thereafter” 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes - 2 - 2. Respondents No. 1 to 9 have filed reply to the contempt petition through respondent No.3 i.e. the Deputy Commissioner, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P. inter alia, pleading that:- Re-assessment report, pursuant to communication dated 31.01.2026 had already been submitted prior to the order dated 18.03.2026 passed by this Court; In compliance to the order passed by this Court in Neelama Devi Vs. State of H.P. and others2, it has been ensured that while passing the final order as per the provisions of Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and Rules framed thereunder, respondent No.3 had considered the re-assessment report only to the limited extent of three works mentioned in the aforesaid order passed in Neelama Devi2; Except for limited modifications relating to the said three works, the final order was passed based upon Inquiry Officer’s findings and the record attached therein. 3. In view of above pleadings, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though these proceedings be closed, however, petitioner be reserved liberty to assail the order dated 31.03.2026 in accordance with law in 2 CWP No. 2875 of 2026 decided on 18.03.2026 - 3 - appropriate proceedings. 4. Taking note of reply filed by the respondents No. 1 to 9 and the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, present contempt proceedings are closed. Notices issued to the respondents No. 1 to 9 are discharged. Petitioner, shall, however, be at liberty to seek appropriate remedy for the redressal of her surviving grievances, if any, including against order dated 31.03.2026, in accordance with law. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge June 15, 2026 R.Atal