Date Of Decision: 18.11.2024 vs Rohan Chand Thakur
2024 Latest Caselaw 17556 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Date Of Decision: 18.11.2024 vs Rohan Chand Thakur on 18 November, 2024

Author: Sandeep Sharma

Bench: Sandeep Sharma

2024:HHC:11678

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

COPC No.675 of 2024 Date of Decision: 18.11.2024 _______________________________________________________ Ranbir Singh .......Petitioner Versus

Rohan Chand Thakur ... Respondent ______________________________________________________ Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Rinkle, Advocate vice Mr. Balwant Singh Thakur, Advocate.

For the Respondent: Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocate. _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):

By way of instant contempt petition, prayer has been

made on behalf of the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings

against the respondent for his having intentionally and deliberately

disobeyed the mandate contained in judgment/order dated

11.01.2024 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP

No.469 of 2024, titled Sandeep Kumar and others vs. State of

Himachal Pradesh.

2. Careful perusal of aforesaid order/judgment, alleged to

have been violated, reveals that Co-ordinate Bench of this Court,

while disposing of the petition, directed respondent No.1, Managing

Director, Himachal Pradesh Transport Corporation to consider

Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2024:HHC:11678

representation dated 20.12.2023 in light of judgment passed by

Division Bench of this Court in CWPOA No.2343 of 2020, titled

Vikram Singh vs. Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation

and others, within a period of six weeks. Since, despite there being

specific direction to do the needful, as taken note above, respondent

failed to do the needful in terms of aforesaid judgment, petitioner has

approached this Court in the instant proceedings.

3. Mr. Raman Jamalta, learned counsel representing the

respondent, states that though he has every reason to believe and

presume that by now aforesaid judgment/ order alleged to have been

violated, must have been complied with, but if not, same would be

complied with within a period of two months from today.

4. Consequently, in view of the fair statement made by

learned counsel for the respondent, this Court sees no reason to keep

the present proceedings alive and accordingly, same are closed with

the direction to the respondent to do the needful in terms of

judgment/order dated 11.01.2024, positively within a period of two

months, if not already done, failing which, he would further aggravate

the contempt. Petitioner is at liberty to get the present proceedings

revived in case aforesaid judgment is not complied with, so that

appropriate action, in accordance with law, is taken against the erring

2024:HHC:11678

official. Notice issued to the respondent is hereby discharged

accordingly.

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge November 18,2024 (shankar)