1 2026:HHC:17417 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No. : 603 of 2026 Date of order : 15.05.2026 Dharmender Kumar …Petitioner Versus Sh. Nagender Pal …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Ms. Madhurika Sekhon Verma, Advocate. For the respondents : None. Virender Singh, Judge. (Oral) Petitioner-Dharmender Kumar has filed the present contempt petition, under Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, read with Section 215 of the Constitution of India, for initiating the contempt proceedings, against the respondent, for intentionally and deliberately disobeying the judgment, dated 8th May, 2026, passed by this Court, in CWP No. 7137 of 2026, titled as Dharmender Kumar versus State of H.P. 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2026:HHC:17417 2. As per the record, annexed with the petition, CWP No. 7137 of 2026, has been decided by this Court, on 8th May, 2026, while passing the following order: “Taking note of the respective stands of the parties, this writ petition is disposed of with the order that in case the petitioner returns & deposits all the articles as qualified & quantified in Annexure P-2, dated 30.04.2026, at his own cost by 11:00 am on 10.05.2026 to respondent No. 4, the requisite No Objection Certificate shall be issued in his favour by respondent No. 4 on 10.05.2026 by 01:00 pm.” 3. In terms of the order, reproduced hereinabove, the petitioner was held entitled to get the No Objection Certificate, on 10th May, 2026, by 01.00 pm, if he returns and deposits all the articles, as qualified and quantified in Annexure P-2, dated 30th April, 2026, at his own cost, by 11.00 am, on 10th May, 2026, to respondent No. 4. 4. The petitioner himself, in para 5 of the contempt petition, has pleaded that he is ready and willing to comply with the directions passed by this Court and to return all the material/articles, as directed, but, due to practical and unavoidable difficulties, it has not been possible for the applicant to transport and return all the articles, as directed, for the reason, that there is no road facility available up to the location, where the material is 3 2026:HHC:17417 lying. Meaning thereby, the petitioner himself has not complied with the directions of this Court to obtain No Objection Certificate. 5. In this factual background, learned counsel for the petitioner has miserably failed to point out as to how the present contempt petition is maintainable. Once, the petitioner himself has not complied with the directions of this Court, then, it does not lie in his mouth to say that there is intentional and deliberate disobedience of the directions of this Court, by the respondents. 6. In view of the above, no case for intentional and deliberate disobedience of the directions of this Court is made out. Consequently, the contempt petition is dismissed. ( Virender Singh ) Judge May 15, 2026 ( rajni )