PRAKASH CHAND AND ANOTHER v. A. SHAINAMOL AND ANOTHER
COPC/317/2026 · 2026-06-16
Sushil Kukreja
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 11803 (HP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 11803 (HP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1 ( 2026:HHC:22433 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.317 of 2026 Date of Decision: 16.06.2026 ___________________________________________________ Prakash Chand and another ....Petitioners Versus A.Shainamol and another …Respondents ___________________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 ________________________________________________ For the petitioners : Mr. Ganesh Barowalia, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. B.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ________________________________________________ Sushil Kukreja, Judge (Oral) On 12.05.2026, this Court passed the following
order:-
“Learned Additional Advocate General, has placed on record the communication dated 11.05.2026, wherein it has been stated as under: ‘That in compliance to the above mentioned
judgment of the Hon’ble Court the matter was referred to the Govt. in view of the Hon’ble High Court directions contained in judgment dated 19.1.2025 in Para No.(v). Accordingly the Govt. vide letter dated 5.3.2026 has conveyed that the matter was examined regarding relaxation in the educational qualification for promotion of 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2 ( 2026:HHC:22433 ) the Lab. Attendant and amendment in the R&P Rules of Lab Technician and since the education qualification are necessary under the R&P Rules as such the proposal could not be acceded to. The copy of letter dated 05.03.2026 is enclosed as Annexure “A”.’ Learned vice counsel for the petitioner prays for and is granted two weeks’ further time to seek instructions. As prayed for, list on 29.05.2026.”
2. Therefore, in this view of the matter, no further orders are required to be passed in the present contempt petition and accordingly, the same is closed and disposed of. Notice discharged
3. However, the petitioners are at liberty to challenge the aforesaid letter dated 05.03.2026, in accordance with law, if they are still aggrieved. The petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. ( Sushil Kukreja ) June 16, 2026 Judge (V. Himalvi)