Krishan Dass vs Kumad Singh & Another

Sandeep Sharma, J

By way of present Contempt Petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings against the

respondents for having intentionally and deliberately disobeyed the judgment dated 11.11.2019, passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP

No.2128 of 2019, titled as Sh. Krishan Dass versus The Himachal Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation and another.

Careful perusal of aforesaid judgment, alleged to have been violated, (Annexure CÂ1), reveals that Division Bench of this Court having taken note

of the statement made by the learned counsel representing the petitioner that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered under the judgment dated

17.7.2014 rendered by this Court in CWP No.3050 of 2014, titled Nek Ram versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, disposed of the petition with

a direction to the respondents/competent authority to grant benefit of aforesaid judgment to the petitioner, if he is found to be similarly situate, within a

period of three months. Since despite there being specific direction to do the needful within a period of three months, respondents have failed to grant

the benefit to the petitioner in terms of the judgment passed by this Court in Nek Ram’s case supra, petitioner has approached this Court in the

instant proceedings.

Mr. Naresh Kaul, learned counsel representing the respondents while accepting notice on behalf of the respondents states that though he has every

reason to believe and presume that by now aforesaid judgment alleged to have been violated, must have been complied with, but if not, same would be

complied with within a period of two weeks from today.

Consequently, in view of the fair statement made by learned counsel representing the respondents, this Court sees no reason to keep the present

petition alive and as such, same is accordingly disposed of with the direction to the respondents to do the needful within a period of two weeks, if not

already done, failing which, they would further aggravate the contempt. Petitioner is at liberty to get the present proceedings revived in case aforesaid

judgment is not complied with, so that appropriate action, in accordance with law is taken against erring official. Notices issued to the respondent is

hereby discharged accordingly.