1 ( 2026:HHC:30479 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.503 of 2026 Date of Decision: 23.07.2026 ___________________________________________________ Manju Parti ....Petitioner Versus Rakesh Kanwar and others …Respondents ___________________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 ________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. Yudhbir Singh Thakur & Ms.Oshin Anand Chauhan, Advocates. For the respondents : Mr. Manoj Chauhan, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 & 2/State. Mr. Bhupinder Pathania, Advocate, for respondents No.3 & 4. ________________________________________________ Sushil Kukreja, Judge (Oral) Compliance affidavit has been filed by respondent No.3-Baljeet Patial, wherein it has been mentioned that the judgment/order passed by this Court stands duly complied with and the delay, if any, was entirely systemic, owing initially to the processing time frame at the Sub-Treasury, Kangra and subsequently due to the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 ( 2026:HHC:30479 ) petitioner’s own laches and delay in coming to their office for collecting her amount of leave encashment. 2. However, learned counsel for the petitioner disputes the correctness of the averments made by respondent No.3 in his affidavit. 3. Be that as it may, now the controversy only revolves around the fact that whether the respondents are liable to pay interest @ 6% per annum in terms of judgment under reference, passed in a batch of petitions, lead case being CWP No.6583 of 2025. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he does not want to press this contempt petition. However, liberty may be reserved to the petitioner to take recourse to the execution petition. 5. In view of the above, no further order is required to be passed in the present petition and the matter is closed. Consequently, the contempt petition is dismissed as not pressed. 3 ( 2026:HHC:30479 ) 6. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to take recourse to the appropriate legal remedy available to her under the law, including filing of execution petition. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ( Sushil Kukreja ) July 23, 2026 Judge (V. Himalvi)