Smt. Madhu Mahajan And Ors vs Rakesh Kanwar And Anr
2025 Latest Caselaw 9387 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Smt. Madhu Mahajan And Ors vs Rakesh Kanwar And Anr on 25 September, 2025

Author: Sandeep Sharma

Bench: Sandeep Sharma

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                                                      COPC No. 1025 of 2025
                                                 Date of Decision: 25.9.2025




                                                                      .
    _____________________________________________________________________





    Smt. Madhu Mahajan and Ors.
                                                                        .........Petitioners
                                                 Versus





    Rakesh Kanwar and Anr.
                                                                       .......Respondents
    Coram
    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting?





    For the Petitioners:       Mr. Dushyant Dadwal, Advocate.
    For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan
                         Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma,

                         Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi
                         Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General.

    ___________________________________________________________________________
    Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

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

the petitioners for initiation of contempt proceedings against the

respondents for their having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the

directions contained in order/judgment dated 27.6.2025 passed in CWP

No. 964 of 2020, titled as Madhu Mahajan and Ors. v. State of Himachal

Pradesh and Ors., whereby coordinate Bench of this Court disposed of the

petition with direction to the competent authority to consider and decide

case of the petitioners in light of judgment dated 17.10.2023, passed in

CWP No. 7526 of 2021, titled Laiq Ram Sharma and Anr. v. State of

Himachal Pradesh and another, which further came to be upheld by

Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 311 of 2024, titled State of

Himachal Pradesh and another v. Laiq Ram Sharma and Anr., lead case

whereof is LPA No. 356 of 2024, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh and

.

another v. Kartar Chand, within a period of four weeks. Since despite

repeated requests, aforesaid direction never came to be complied with,

petitioners are compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings.

2. Mr. B.C Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, submits

that though he has every reason to presume that by now, judgment alleged

to have been violated must have been complied with in its totality, but if

not, same would be positively complied with within a period of two 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 two weeks, failing which they would

aggravate the contempt and petitioners would be at liberty to get the

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

taken against the erring officials.

    September 25, 2025                                       (Sandeep Sharma),
         (manjit)                                                 Judge