1 ( 2026:HHC:35826 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No. 1038 of 2026 Decided on: 24.08.2026 ________________________________________________ Pyare Lal ....Petitioner Versus Raghav Sharma …Respondent _ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Abhyendra Gupta, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Raj Kumar Negi, Additional Advocate General. Sushil Kukreja, Judge (oral) Compliance affidavit has been filed, wherein, it has been stated that Gram Panchayat Salyana has allowed the petitioner to resume/continue his duties as Panchayat Chowkidar. 2. Therefore, in this view of the matter, no further orders are required to be passed in the present contempt petition and the same is closed. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 ( 2026:HHC:35826 ) 4. The petition, so also pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. ( Sushil Kukreja ) 24th August, 2026 Judge (raman)

1 ( 2026:HHC:35826 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No. 1038 of 2026 Decided on: 24.08.2026 ________________________________________________ Pyare Lal ....Petitioner Versus Raghav Sharma …Respondent _ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Abhyendra Gupta, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Raj Kumar Negi, Additional Advocate General. Sushil Kukreja, Judge (oral) Compliance affidavit has been filed, wherein, it has been stated that Gram Panchayat Salyana has allowed the petitioner to resume/continue his duties as Panchayat Chowkidar. 2. Therefore, in this view of the matter, no further orders are required to be passed in the present contempt petition and the same is closed. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 ( 2026:HHC:35826 ) 4. The petition, so also pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. ( Sushil Kukreja ) 24th August, 2026 Judge (raman)