Shakuntla Sharma v. K.K. Sharma and Others
Case brief
What is this about?
In this contempt petition, the petitioner challenged non-implementation of directions from a 2018 judgment regarding the construction of an ambulance road. After a compliance report confirmed the road's completion, the court closed the petition, noting the petitioner's dissatisfaction with the gradient but ruling no further order was required.
What did the court decide?
The contempt petition is closed; notices to respondents are discharged; freedom reserved for other grievances.
What the court decided
Shakuntla Sharma Vs. K.K.Sharma and others
COPC No. 59 of 2023
- 15.07.2024 Present: Mr. Hamender Singh Chandel, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Y.P.S.Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General for respondents No.1 and 2.
Mr. Naveen K. Bhardwaj, Advocate, for respondent No.3.
Sh. Jitender Kumar, Superintending Engineer, 6th Circle, HPPWD Kullu and Sh. B.C. Negi, Executive Engineer, HPPWD, Division Kullu, present in person.
The petitioner alleged violation of the directions contained in judgment dated 09.08.2018, rendered in CWPIL No. 132 of 2018.
2. The above numbered petition was disposed of with the following operative directions: -
- “8. Consequently, in view of above, present petition is closed with a direction to the Deputy Commissioner, Kullu, to immediately take action on the aforesaid communication preferably within ten days from today and provide adequate funds. If Deputy Commissioner, Kullu, does not have sufficient funds as reflected in the estimate submitted to him, he shall take up the matter with the Secretary (Urban Development) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, within a period of one week from today and ensure that required funds are made available so that construction of ambulance road is commenced at the earliest. If there is dispute with regard to land, Deputy Commissioner, shall make all possible efforts to identify the government land, which can be used for the construction of ambulance
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order in this contempt petition should be closed after the physical construction of the ambulance road was completed.
Whether the petitioner deserves any further relief regarding the steep gradient of the constructed road.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Shakuntla Sharma
- respondent
K.K. Sharma
- respondent
Respondents No. 2
- respondent
Respondent No. 3
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Himachal Pradesh HC
- Decided on
- · July
- Registered
- Case no.
- COPC/59/2023
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court