Himachal Pradesh High Court
COPC/1441/2026 of DINESH KUMAR AND ANOTHER Vs ASHISH KOHLI on 23 September 2026
COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.1441 of 2026 Date of Decision: 23.9.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Dinesh Kumar and Anr. ……...Petitioners Versus Ashish Kohli …....Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma,
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
COPC No.1441 of 2026
Date of Decision: 23.9.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Dinesh Kumar and Anr. ……...Petitioners Versus Ashish Kohli
…....Respondent
Coram
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?
For the Petitioners: Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates 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 petitioners for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent for his having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the directions contained in order/judgment dated 28.4.2026, passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No.5286 of 2026, titled Dinesh Kumar and Anr. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., whereby afore petition came to be disposed of with a direction to respondent/competent authority to consider and decide representations of the petitioners within twelve weeks. Since no action, whatsoever, came to be taken at the behest
2 of the respondent pursuant to aforesaid direction, petitioners have approached this Court in the instant proceedings.
2. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondent, states that though he has every reason to presume and believe that by now, order/judgment sought to be executed, must have been complied with in its totality, but if not, same would be definitely 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 present petition alive and accordingly, same is disposed of with direction to the respondent to do the needful in terms of judgment alleged to have been violated within a period of three weeks, failing which 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 23, 2026
(Sandeep Sharma), (manjit)
Judge