2026:HHC:13303 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.189 of 2019 Decided on: 24th April, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Kurgan Landlosers Transport Cooperative Society, Mangoo …..Petitioner Versus Shri Bimlendra Jha and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, Senior Advocate with Mr. Abhinav M. Goel, Advocate, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No.4. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge This contempt petition was instituted on 27.09.2019 with the allegations that the respondents had wilfully flouted the order passed on 14.06.2019 in CWP No.879 of 2019. The main writ petition itself was disposed of on 31.10.2019 as infructuous. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file. 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes 2 2026:HHC:13303 3. Facts:- 3(i). Petitioner-Transport Co-operative Society, Mangoo, District Solan was registered on 19.07.2016. Some co-operative societies operating in that area had preferred writ petitions, which were disposed of in the year 2016 with direction to the Registrar Co-operative Societies, Himachal Pradesh to examine the grievances of the petitioners therein. 3(ii). The petitioner also moved an application before the Registrar Co-operative Societies for impleadment in order to be heard in the matter. Petitioner’s application was dismissed. Petitioner instituted CWP No.2063 of 2016, which was disposed of on 09.08.2016 with liberty reserved to it to seek appropriate remedy. 3(iii). Petitioner preferred representation to the Deputy Commissioner, Solan for providing work to it. Since petitioner’s representation was not decided, it instituted CWP No.841 of 2018. The writ petition was disposed of on 18.04.2018 with direction to the competent authority to decide petitioner’s representation expeditiously within a period of two months. 3(iv). On 28.03.2019, the Deputy Commissioner, Solan passed an order, inter alia, allotting 10% work to the 3 2026:HHC:13303 petitioner-Society, i.e. 5% in Suli Unit and 5% in Rauri Unit of M/s Ambuja Cement Limited. 3(v). One Co-operative Society by the name of Solan District Transport Operators instituted a civil suit before the learned Civil Judge, Arki, wherein status quo ante order was passed on 05.04.2019. On an application filed by M/s Ambuja Cement Limited for vacation of the interim order, status quo ante order was vacated on 12.06.2019. 3(vi). CWP No.879 of 2019 was instituted by M/s Golden Land Loser Transport Co-operative Society. Notices were issued in this petition on 29.04.2019. In the said writ petition, challenge, inter alia, was laid to allotment of 10% work to the petitioner-society. The writ petition was listed on 10.05.2019, when while granting time to file reply to the respondents, directions were issued that review petition, if any, pending against the impugned order dated 28.03.2019 be decided within two weeks after hearing the concerned parties. The order dated 28.03.2019 was the one, where 10% work had been allotted to the petitioner-Society. 3(vii). Vide order dated 14.06.2019 passed in CWP No.879 of 2019, the parties were directed to maintain status quo as on date qua the work allotted, which was not to create any equity in favour of either party even in case of 4 2026:HHC:13303 increase in number of trucks. It is this order, which the petitioner has alleged to have been violated by the respondents. 3(viii). According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the meeting of Regulatory Committee was held on 20.06.2019; Documents of members of the petitioner- Society were examined and 63 files were cleared; Despite this, proportionate work was not given to the petitioner- Society. 3(ix). From the documents on record, it emerges that order dated 28.03.2019 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Solan was kept in abeyance vide another order passed on 24.06.2019. The latter order was withdrawn vide order dated 31.07.2019 on the representation made by the petitioner, thereby restoring the order dated 28.03.2019. The Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil) Arki, District Solan on 06.10.2019 ordered stopping the work to the petitioner-Society. 3(x). Feeling aggrieved, COPC No.165 of 2019 was instituted by the petitioner. Since the concerned officer- respondent No.4 withdrew the order dated 06.08.2019, the contempt petition was disposed of on 29.08.2019 and the 5 2026:HHC:13303 contempt proceedings were closed keeping in view the unconditional apology tendered by the officer. 3(xi). Respondent-M/s Ambuja Cement Limited solicited the advice of Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil) on 31.08.2019 for proceeding further in the matter with regard to transportation demand being raised by the petitioner- Society for grant of transportation work. There are documents on record reflecting that the petitioner-Society also requested M/s Ambuja Cement Limited to allot work to two of its members, whose names were recommended by the Regulatory Committee. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the Regulatory Committee had cleared the files of 63 members on 20.06.2019 and 22.06.2019, therefore, proportionate work was required to be allotted to its members. This has been disputed by the respondents. According to them, proceedings of above meetings stood declared as infructuous on 24.06.2019. A detailed sequence of events towards consideration of petitioner’s case has been narrated in the reply filed by respondent No.4 on 21.10.2019. Further, in supplementary affidavit filed by respondent No.4, it has come as under:- 6 2026:HHC:13303 “ii). That the aforesaid order dated 28.03.2019 was communicated to the Petitioner society as well as to the then SDM, Arki and other stake holders by Deputy Commissioner office for its compliance. The Petitioner society was well aware of the said order and following which the proponents of the Petitioner society met with the then SDM-cum-Chairman of the Regulatory Committee to proceed to the next step after allocation of work i.e. recommendation of their 252 members by the Regulatory Committee as per criteria mentioned in the order dated 26.03.2010 (already appended in the case file as Annexure R-4/4) so that the logistic work can be distributed among them all as allotted to them vide order dated 28.03.2019 passed by the then Deputy Commissioner, Solan. vi). That the then SDM, Arki was not aware of the order dated 14.06.2019 passed by the Hon'ble Court as same was not received to him till the time and, thus, he informed the present Petitioner society telephonically to be remain present in a meeting of the Regulatory Committee, alongwith all relevant record of their members, which was going to be held on 20.6.2019 & 22.6.2019 (already appended in the case file as Annexure R-4/10) so as to decide the eligibility of their 252 members and following which the proponents of Petitioner society had submitted the list of 63 members only before the then SDM, Arki. vii). That, thereafter, the then Deputy Commissioner Solan has passed an order dated 24.06.2019 (already appended in the case file as Annexure R-4/7), wherein, he kept his earlier order dated 28.03.2019 in abeyance and directed the Regulatory Committee to ascertain the eligibility of all 252 members of the Petitioner society in accordance with the instructions contained in order dated 26.03.2010 within four weeks of time. The reference of maintaining status quo order dated 14.06.2019 passed by the Hon'ble High Court in CWP No.879 of 2019 was also found to be mentioned in the said order issued by the then Deputy Commissioner, Solan and by virtue of that the said order came into the knowledge of the then SDM, Arki. viii). That it is an admitted fact that 10% work allotment order dated 28.03.2019 was passed in favour of Petitioner society, which infect, as of 14.06.2019 when the Hon'ble High Court passed an interim order of 7 2026:HHC:13303 maintaining status quo qua the work allotment, was only at the implementation stage, as same was yet to be distributed on the ground among the eligible members of the Petitioner society and would only be distributed after due verification as per criteria mentioned in order dated 26.03.2019. Thereafter, following the status quo order dated 14.06.2019 passed by the Hon'ble High Court and order dated 24.06.2019 passed by the then Deputy Commissioner, Solan, the SDM, Arki held the proceedings dated 20.06.2019 & 22.06.2019 as infructuous and process to re-ascertain the eligibility of the members of Petitioner Society as directed by the then Deputy Commissioner, Solan vide order dated 24.06.2019, was restarted again. 5. That it may kindly be appreciated that the order dated 26.03.2010 passed by the then Deputy Commissioner, Solan provides a uniform mechanism for determining the eligibility of new members across all transport cooperative societies functioning in the area of operation of M/s Ambuja Cements Ltd. Darlaghat. The Regulatory Committee, in discharge of its assigned duty, convened nine (9) rounds of meetings just to ascertain the eligibility of the members of Petitioner's society and four (4) meetings out of these nine (9) were convened after 29.08.2019 i.e. on 26.09.2019, 03.10.2019, 5.10.2019 and 18.10.2019 (which has already been appended as Annexure R-4/15 in the response filed by Contemnor No.4) for the purpose of verifying the eligibility of the 252 members as claimed to be genuine by the Petitioner Society. Hence, the Regulatory Committee has at all times acted within the legal framework and complied with the directions of the order dated 14.06.2019 passed by this Hon'ble Court and as well as order dated 26.03.2010 passed by Deputy Commissioner Solan, which mandates that eligibility of any new member, across all the transport cooperative societies, shall be scrutinized first and approved by the Committee, thereafter, they can be start the logistic work in the company as per their share/quota which, infect, was not distributed as of order dated 14.06.2019 on the ground level, and, therefore, has not been distributed to maintain the status quo till the time interim order dated 14.06.2019 remained in force. Hence, in view of above submissions, the deponents humbly submitted that there was no disobedience on the part of Contemnor No.4, and, thus, present contempt 8 2026:HHC:13303 proceedings is not maintainable against the same and is liable to be dropped. 6. That the Regulatory Committee, with utmost respect to the order of this Hon'ble Court dated 14.06.2019, had never disobeyed the same at any point of time, and, further, maintained the same status on the ground level as it was on 14.06.2019. Hence, the Regulatory Committee has acted fairly and in accordance with the order dated 14.06.2019, since, the status was practically kept unchanged till the time the aforesaid interim order dated 14.06.2019 remained in force but, even, if any action of the Contemnor No.4 is construed as disobedience, the same is not wilful and deliberated and for it the answering deponent tenders his unconditional, unqualified and sincere apology again to this Hon’ble court without offering any justification for the same with a further request that out of generosity vested with this Hon'ble court the same may kindly be accepted and proceedings of contempt may kindly be dropped/discharged in the interest of justice.” Its an admitted fact that the order dated 28.03.2019 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Solan, which was to be adhered to in terms of order dated 14.06.2019 passed in CWP No.879 of 2019 has since been revised on 31.01.2020, in terms whereof, the petitioner- Society has been held entitled to allotment of 1.25 % of work each in Suli and Rauri Units of M/s Ambuja Cement Limited. During hearing of the case, it has been apprised that this order has further underwent change. Be that as it may. It is also a matter of record that CWP No.879 of 2019, in which order dated 14.06.2019 alleged to have been 9 2026:HHC:13303 violated, was passed, was itself disposed of on 31.10.2019 as under:- “Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record the written instructions. Annexed thereto is the order dated 28.10.2019, whereby the impugned order Annexure P-10 has been cancelled. Being so, the writ petition has turned infructuous and the same is accordingly disposed of. The pending application(s), if any, including CMP No.10635 of 2019 will also stand disposed of accordingly.” The contempt alleged by the petitioner, in the given facts and circumstances, even otherwise, cannot be said to be a wilful or intentional disobedience. More than six years have gone by from the date of institution of this contempt petition and also from the date of disposal of the main writ petition. The order dated 28.03.2019, which was directed to be maintained in the interim order dated 14.06.2019 passed in CWP No.879 of 2019, had been revised on 31.01.2020. In view of above, no contempt can be said to have been made out. Accordingly, the present contempt proceedings are closed. Notices issued to the respondents are discharged. Jyotsna Rewal Dua April 24, 2026 Judge Mukesh