IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA COPC No.1551 of 2026 Decided on: 01.10.2026 _______________________________________________________________ Gurcharan Singh ....Petitioner Versus Shivam Partap Singh and another ....Respondents Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. V.K. Gupta, Learned Counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2. Ranjan Sharma, Judge Petitioner has invoked the contempt jurisdiction of this Court, alleging non-compliance of the order dated 12.03.2026, passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2823 of 2026, titled as Gurcharan Singh versus Himachal Road Transport Corporation and another. The Operative part of the order reads as under:- “2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed representation with regard to the issue raised in the petition, but the same has not been decided by the Authority concerned till date. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 3. This petition, accordingly, as prayed for, is disposed of with the direction that let representation of the petitioner be decided, in the light of the averments made therein as well as the judgment being relied upon by the petitioner, within a period of twelve weeks by the Competent Authority. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any view on the merits of the case and the representation shall be decided by the Authority independently without being influenced by any observation made by this Court in this regard. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that neither the representation [annexed with the said Writ Petition] has been decided nor any speaking order has been conveyed to the petitioner, as yet. 3. Heard. 4. Notice. Mr. Varun Chandel, Learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the sole respondent. 5. At this stage, Learned Counsel for the petitioner prays that Respondent may be directed to implement the order dated 12.03.2026 [Annexure C-1] in a time bound manner. Prayer being innocuous, is not opposed by Learned Counsel for Respondent case. 6. Considering the matter in above perspective 3 and as prayed by Learned Counsel for the petitioner, instant petition is closed, with a direction to the Respondent to decide the representation [annexed with the said Writ Petition] by passing a speaking order and to convey the decision [if not already conveyed], within six weeks from today. 7. Notice, issued to the respondent, shall stand discharged, accordingly. 8. Needless to say, that in case, the order passed by this Court, is not complied with, the petitioner is free to seek appropriate remedy, hereinafter in accordance with law. In aforesaid terms, instant petition and all the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Ranjan Sharma) Judge October 01, 2026 (Anita)