2026:HHC:39604 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No. 1330 of 2026 Date of decision: 16.09.2026. Priyanka & another ...Petitioners. Versus Sudha Devi & others ...Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Ms. Manta Garg, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Varun Chadel, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 and 2. None for respondent No.3. Ranjan Sharma, Judge (Oral): Petitioners have invoked contempt jurisdiction of this Court, alleging non-compliance of the judgment dated 28.04.2026 [Annexure P-1], passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, in CWP No. 5268 of 2026, titled as Priyanka & another vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & others, directing the Respondents-Competent Authority 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes -2- to decide the representation(s) [Annexure P-2 (colly) in the said writ petition] within twelve weeks, by passing a speaking order, in accordance with law. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that neither representation has been decided nor speaking order has been communicated to them as yet. 3. Heard. 4. Notice. Learned Additional Advocate General accepts notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2.

5. In aforesaid circumstances and as prayed by Learned Counsel for petitioner(s), instant petition, is disposed of, with direction to the Respondents-Competent Authority, to comply with the judgment dated 28.04.2026 [Annexure P-1], by passing a speaking order [if already not passed], within a period of six weeks positively, from today. 6. Needless to say that in case representation(s) has already been decided, the order on the representation(s)/speaking order be conveyed to the petitioners, within the above period. -3- In aforesaid terms, the instant proceedings are closed and notice is discharged. (Ranjan Sharma) Judge 16th September, 2026. (kck)

2026:HHC:39604 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No. 1330 of 2026 Date of decision: 16.09.2026. Priyanka & another ...Petitioners. Versus Sudha Devi & others ...Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Ms. Manta Garg, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Varun Chadel, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 and 2. None for respondent No.3. Ranjan Sharma, Judge (Oral): Petitioners have invoked contempt jurisdiction of this Court, alleging non-compliance of the judgment dated 28.04.2026 [Annexure P-1], passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, in CWP No. 5268 of 2026, titled as Priyanka & another vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & others, directing the Respondents-Competent Authority 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes -2- to decide the representation(s) [Annexure P-2 (colly) in the said writ petition] within twelve weeks, by passing a speaking order, in accordance with law. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that neither representation has been decided nor speaking order has been communicated to them as yet. 3. Heard. 4. Notice. Learned Additional Advocate General accepts notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2.

5. In aforesaid circumstances and as prayed by Learned Counsel for petitioner(s), instant petition, is disposed of, with direction to the Respondents-Competent Authority, to comply with the judgment dated 28.04.2026 [Annexure P-1], by passing a speaking order [if already not passed], within a period of six weeks positively, from today. 6. Needless to say that in case representation(s) has already been decided, the order on the representation(s)/speaking order be conveyed to the petitioners, within the above period. -3- In aforesaid terms, the instant proceedings are closed and notice is discharged. (Ranjan Sharma) Judge 16th September, 2026. (kck)