CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Joginder Singh vs Priyanka Kumari And Anr

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 23 March 2026 · Citation: (2026) 03 SHI CK 0742

HON’BLE JUDGES
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
COPC No.1550 Of 2025
Ask AI about this case

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

8 paragraphs · 307 words

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

1.

Petitioner alleges violation of directions issued in Joginder Singh Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others[CWP No.12708 of 2025 decided on 06.08.2025].

2.

Following operative directions were issued in Joginder Singh[CWP No.12708 of 2025 decided on 06.08.2025]:-

“2. This petition is disposed of with the observation that the proceedings which have been initiated by the Authorities concerned in the light of the complaints filed by the villagers, be taken to their logical conclusion within a time bound period, i.e. on or before 31.10.2025, by complying with the principles of natural justice as well as Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act. It is clarified that this Court has not made any observation on the merits of the case. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand disposed of accordingly.”

3.

Respondents have filed the compliance affidavit, in terms thereof, an inquiry was initiated by the respondents at Block level through the Block Development Officer Shillai, District Sirmour, H.P. on 05.03.2025. During the course of inquiry, petitioner appeared before the inquiry team on 24.09.2025 and voluntarily submitted his sworn affidavit to the effect that he does not wish to pursue the complaint any further. In view of petitioner’s voluntary withdrawal statement, the complaint was taken on record as withdrawn and the inquiry proceedings were closed at the office level. Alongwith the compliance affidavit, respondents have enclosed the sworn affidavit of the petitioner. Petitioner’s statement recorded before the Inquiry Officer in this regard has also been placed on record.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that despite his best efforts, petitioner has not imparted any specific instructions to him.

5.

Taking note of above compliance affidavit filed by the respondents and the documents appended therewith, these contempt proceedings are closed. Notices issued to the respondents are discharged.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.