Himachal Pradesh High Court
COPC/1825/2026 on 4 November 2026
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 AT SHIMLA
COPC No.1825 of 2026
IN CWP No.2414 of 2026 Decided on: 04.11.2026. ______________________________________________________________
Sunita Devi
....Petitioner
Versus
Ashish Kumar Kohli and other
....Respondents
Coram
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting?
For the petitioner : None though represented by Mr. Piar Chand, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Varun Chandel, Additional Advocate General.
Ranjan Sharma, Judge
Petitioner has invoked contempt jurisdiction of this Court, alleging non-compliance of the order/ judgment dated 16.03.2026 [Annexure C-1], passed by this Court, in CWP No.2414 of 2026, titled as Sunita Devi versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another. The Operative part of the order/judgment reads as under: “2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
( 2026:HHC:48624 )
submits that the petitioner has filed representation (Annexure P-7), with the respondent–Department and this petition be disposed of by directing the Competent Authority to take appropriate decision thereupon within some time bound period in light of the averments made therein.
3. This Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of with the direction that the representation filed by the petitioner be decided by the Competent Authority in light of the averments made therein within a period of eight weeks from today..’’
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that neither the representations [Annexed with the said Writ Petition] have been decided nor a speaking order has been conveyed to them as yet.
3. Heard.
4. Notice. Mr. Varun Chandel, Learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the Respondents.
5. Upon listing of the case Learned Counsel for Respondent, states that Respondents may be granted some time to implement the order/judgment in letter and spirit.
( 2026:HHC:48624 )
[Statement taken on record].
6. Considering the matter in the light of the statement made by Learned Counsel for petitioner, order/judgment dated 16.03.2026 be impleaded within six weeks from today.
7. In aforesaid terms, instant petition and all the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(Ranjan Sharma)
Judge
November 04, 2026
[Anita]