AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
17 paragraphs · 342 wordsSandeep Sharma, J
By way of present contempt petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent
for having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the directions contained in order/judgment dated 9.1.2020, passed by the Division Bench this Court in
Ex.Pet. No. 102 of 2019 in CWP No. 682 of 2013, titled Desh Raj V. State of H.P. and Anr. , whereby the Division Bench having taken note of the
statement made by the learned Deputy Advocate General that respondents have decided to pay the arrears in terms of the judgment passed by this
Court in LPA No. 105 of 2010, titled State of HP v. Rakesh Chand and Ors and CWP(T) No. 14232 of 2008 titled Nek Ram v. State of HP and Ors.,
disposed of the execution petition being fully satisfied However, fact remains that after passing of aforesaid order dated 9.1.2020, no arrears in terms
of aforesaid undertaking given by the learned Deputy Advocate General ever came to be released in favour of the petitioner. Hence, petitioner was
compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings.
Mr. Arvind Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, while accepting the notice on behalf of the respondents, 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.
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 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. Notices issued to respondents stand discharged at this
stage.
