Himachal Pradesh High Court
Dr. Vijay Kumar Sharma vs Balwan Chand And Others on 19 June, 2023
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.5 of 2023 Date of Decision: 19.06.2023 .
_______________________________________________________ Dr. Vijay Kumar Sharma .......Petitioner Versus Balwan Chand and others ... Respondents ______________________________________________________ Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner:
r to Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Senior Advocate with Ms. Shailja Thakur, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Surender Verma, Advocate. _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):
By way of present Contempt Petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for their having intentionally and deliberately disobeyed the directions contained in judgment/ order dated
2.11.2022, passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.7640 of 2022, titled as Dr. Vijay Kumar Sharma vs. Vice Chancellor Himachal Pradesh University, Summer Hill Shimla, H.P.
2. Careful perusal of aforesaid order/judgment (Annexure C-2) alleged to have been violated, reveals that Division Bench of this Court while disposing of the petition, directed respondent No.2 to 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 19/06/2023 20:36:36 :::CIS 2decide representation dated 1.8.2022 (Annexures P-8) within a period of eight weeks. Since, despite there being specific direction to do the needful, as taken note above, respondents failed to decide the .
representation of the petitioner, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings.
3. Mr. Surender Verma, 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 ten days from today.
4. Consequently, in view of the fair statement made by learned counsel for 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 in terms of judgment/ order dated 2.11.2022, passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.7640 of 2022, positively within a period of ten days, 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 ::: Downloaded on - 19/06/2023 20:36:36 :::CIS 3 official. Notices issued to the respondents are hereby discharged accordingly.
(Sandeep Sharma), .
Judge
June 19, 2023
(shankar)
r to
::: Downloaded on - 19/06/2023 20:36:36 :::CIS