2026:HHC:39797 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA COPC No.1204 of 2026 IN CWP No.4659 of 2020 Decided on: 17.09.2026 __________________________________________________________ Mohinder Singh .....Petitioner Versus Kamlesh Kumar Pant and others ....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? No For the petitioner: Mr. Sanjeev Kuthiala, Senior Advocate with Ms. Tamanna Sharma and Ms. Preet Thakur, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. Varun Chandel, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3. Nemo for respondent No.4. Ranjan Sharma, Judge Heard. 2. Notice. Mr. Varun Chandel, Learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. 3. Petitioner-Mohinder Singh has invoked contempt jurisdiction of this Court, alleging non- compliance of the order dated 15.03.2023 [Annexure 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:39797 P-1] and judgment dated 24.04.2023 [Annexure P-2] passed in CWP No.4659 of 2020, titled as Mohinder Singh and another Versus State of H.P. and others, whereby this Court disposed of the writ petition, by directing Respondent No.3 to construct the remaining portion of the road i.e. from Mohotala to Kareri under the Prime Minister Gram Sadak Yojna, within three months from the date of passing of the said judgment. 4. It is averred that after passing of the judgment, one Shri Ram Dhan had filed writ petition i.e. CWP No.7316 of 2023, titled as Ram Dhan Versus State of Himachal Pradesh, in which, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had passed an order of status quo qua the suit property, in question, vide order dated 05.10.2023 [Annexure P-3]. 5. On query by this Court, this Court is informed that the interim order dated 05.10.2023 [Annexure P-3] is still in operation. 6. In this background, this Court is of the considered view, that once the judgment was passed on 24.04.2023 [Annexure P-2], directing to complete 3 2026:HHC:39797 the road, in question, and any collateral/subsequent proceedings an order was passed on 05.10.2023 by this Court, directing that status quo qua the suit property, in question, to be maintained, therefore, the contempt petition is not maintainable. Moreover, there appears to be no wilful and intentional disobedience of the judgment dated 24.04.2023 [Annexure P-2]. Conversely, the alleged non-implementation as borne out from the material on record is due to interim orders dated 05.10.2023 [Annexure P-3] passed by this Court in subsequent proceedings. 7. Faced with the above eventuality, Learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Ms. Tamanna Sharma and Ms. Preet Thakur, Advocates, on Instructions, states that instant proceedings may be given a closure, with liberty to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy, by way of filing execution or to file appropriate application in pending CWP No.7316 of 2023 [Annexure P-3], hereinafter, if so desired. [Statement is Taken on Record]. 8. In these circumstances, instant contempt petition is closed, with liberty to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy for redressal of his grievance(s) 4 2026:HHC:39797 before appropriate authority in appropriate manner, as he deems fit and proper. 9. Notices issued to the respondents shall stand discharged, accordingly In aforesaid terms, instant petition and all the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Ranjan Sharma) Judge September 17, 2026 [Bhardwaj]