_____________________________________________________________________ vs M. Sudha Devi And Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 9934 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

_____________________________________________________________________ vs M. Sudha Devi And Ors on 5 December, 2025

Author: Sandeep Sharma

Bench: Sandeep Sharma

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA




                                                                     .
                                                     COPC No. 1278 of 2025





                                                 Date of Decision: 5.12.2025
    _____________________________________________________________________
    Ranjodh Singh





                                                                         .........Petitioner
                                                 Versus
    M. Sudha Devi and Ors.
                                                                      .......Respondents




                                               of
    Coram
    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting?

    For the Petitioner:
                         rt    Mr. Munish Datwalia and Mr. Ram Kumar,
                               Advocates.

    For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan
                         Kahol, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ravi
                         Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates
                         General.
    ___________________________________________________________________________



    Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

By way of present contempt petition, prayer has been made by

the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings against the

respondents for their having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the

directions contained in order/judgment dated 1.9.2025 passed in CWP No.

7453 of 2023, titled as Ranjodh Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh and

Ors., whereby this Court disposed of the petition with direction to the

respondents to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of

judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 6443 of

2021, titled as Babu Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.

.

alongwith connected matters, in within four weeks. Since despite repeated

requests, aforesaid direction never came to be complied with, petitioner is

compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings.

2. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, while

of waiving notices on behalf of the respondents, submits that though he has

every reason to presume that by now, judgment alleged to have been rt violated must have been complied with in its totality, but if not, same

would be positively complied with within a period of three weeks from

today.

3. Consequently, in view of the fair stand adopted by the learned

Additional Advocate General, this Court sees no reason to keep the present

petition alive and accordingly, same is closed. However, respondents-

contemnors are directed to do the needful in terms of judgment alleged to

have been violated within a period of three weeks, failing which they would

aggravate the contempt and petitioner would be at liberty to get the present

petition revived so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken

against the erring officials.

    December 5, 2025                                         (Sandeep Sharma),
         (manjit)                                                 Judge