Suryavanshi Vikas Samiti Bayal Vs Torul S. Raveesh and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Suryavanshi Vikas Samiti Bayal Vs Torul S. Raveesh and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of with a direction to respondents No.1 & 2 to ensure disbursement of local area development funds to all eligible beneficiaries on account of 1% Additional Free Power expeditiously, preferably within two months; failing which the petitioner may seek revival of the petition.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents' actions are contumacious, i.e., whether they are guilty of violating the mandate of the earlier judgment relating to disbursement of funds on account of 1% Additional Free Power to eligible beneficiary families, and what directions should issue to secure compliance.

Court's answer

No action of the respondents can be said to be contumacious; adequate steps have already been initiated for compliance of the mandate contained in the judgment alleged to have been violated.

Ratio / Principle

Respondents No.1 & 2 are directed to ensure that disbursement of local area development funds to all eligible beneficiaries on account of 1% Additional Free Power is done expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months.

Key takeaways

If the directed disbursement is not made within the stipulated period, the petitioner would be at liberty to get the present petition revived so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken against the erring officials.ratio¶5
Notices issued to the respondents stand discharged, and the petitioner remains at liberty to file a substantive writ petition before the Court for redressal of any surviving grievance.obiter¶5

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt petition (COPC No.350 of 2025) by Suryavanshi Vikas Samiti Bayal alleging violation of the mandate of an earlier judgment requiring disbursement of local area development funds on account of 1% Additional Free Power to eligible beneficiary families. On the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Vice Chairman, LADA, Kullu placing on record instructions dated 21.06.2025 showing that left-out families had been notified vide Notification No.110-113/LADA dated 24.05.2025 but disbursement awaited clarification and funds from the Director Energy, the Court held that no action of the respondents was contumacious, adequate compliance steps having been initiated. The petition was disposed of with a direction to respondents No.1 & 2 to ensure disbursement expeditiously, preferably within two months, failing which the petitioner may seek revival; notices were discharged and liberty reserved to file a substantive writ petition.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL P RADESH, SHIMLA

COPC No.350 of 2025

Date of Decision: 16.07.2025

Suryavanshi Vikas Samiti Bayal ……...Petitioner Versus Ms. Torul S. Raveesh and Others …....Respondent

Coram

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?

____________________________________________________________ For the Petitioner: Mr. R.M. Bisht, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent No.1 & 2. Mr. Neel Kamal Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.3.

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

While placing on record instructions dated 21.06.2025, issued under the signatures of Deputy Commissioner-cum-Vice Chairman, LADA, Kullu, District Kullu, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, states that mandate contained in the judgment, alleged to have been violated, stands duly complied with.

Having perused aforesaid communication as well as documents annexed therewith, which are taken on record, this Court finds that in terms of judgment, alleged to have been violated, left-out families have been notified vide notification No.110-113/LADA dated 24.05.2025,

2

however, disbursement of funds to all the eligible beneficiary families on account of 1% Additional Free Power has not been done for want of necessary clarification and funds from the Director Energy.

Though as per afore instructions, office of Deputy Commissioner has taken up the matter with the Director of Energy vide letter dated 21.06.2025 for issuance of clarification and releasing the requisite funds, but certainly no time frame has been given in afore communication with regard to disbursement.

Though having taken note of averments contained in the aforesaid communication, no action of respondents can be said to be contumacious, rather, this Court is convinced and satisfied that adequate steps already stand initiated for compliance of mandate contained in the judgment, alleged to have been violated, but certainly, local area development fund is required to be released to the beneficiaries within stipulated time.

Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with the direction to respondents No.1 & 2 to ensure that disbursement of local area development funds to all eligible beneficiaries on account of 1% Additional Free Power is done expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months, failing which, petitioner would be at liberty to

get the present petition revived so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken against the erring officials. Notices issued to the

3

respondents stand hereby discharged. Needless to say, petitioner is always at liberty to file substantive writ petition before the Court of law for

redressal of his surviving grievance, if any.

July 16, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), ( Rajeev Raturi ) Judge