Disposed

Suman Kumari v. M. Sudha Devi and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC18 Sept 2026COPC/1359/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a contempt petition filed for non-compliance with its earlier judgment in CWP No. 6366 of 2026. The court directed the Competent Authority to comply with the judgment dated 14.05.2026 by passing a speaking order on the representations, if not already passed, within six weeks from the date of the order and to convey the order to the petitioners within the same period.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Competent Authority to comply with the judgment dated 14.05.2026 by passing a speaking order on the representations within six weeks, and to convey the order to the petitioners.

Suman Kumari Vs M. Sudha Devi and Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADSH AT SHIMLA COPC No.1359 of 2026

¶2

IN CWP No. 6366 of 2026 Decided on: 18.09.2026

¶3

Suman Kumari ....Petitioners

¶4

Versus

¶5

Sudha Devi and others.

¶6

....Respondents

¶7

Coram :

¶8

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge

¶9

1 Whether approved for reporting? No

¶10

For the petitioners : Ms. Mamta Garg, Advocate.

¶11

For the respondents : Ms. Varun Chandel, Additional Advocate General, for the respondents No. 1 and 2-State. Nemo for respondent No.3.

¶12

Ranjan Sharma, Judge

¶13

Petitioners have invoked the contempt jurisdiction of this Court, alleging non-compliance of the

¶14

judgment dated 14.05.2026, [Annexure P-1], passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 6366 of 2026,

¶15

titled as Suman Kumari and another Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, directing the Competent Authority to decide the representations [Annexure P-2 (colly)

¶16

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶17

¶18

annexed with the said writ petition] within six weeks, by

¶19

passing a speaking order, in accordance with law.

¶20

2 . Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that neither representations have been decided nor a speaking order has been communicated to them as yet.

¶21

3. Heard.

¶22

4 . Notice. Mr. Varun Chandel, Learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of Respondents No. 1 and 2-State.

¶23

5 . In aforesaid circumstances and as prayed by Learned Counsel for petitioners, instant petition is disposed of, with a direction to the Respondents-Competent Authority,

¶24

to comply with the judgment dated 14.05.2026 [Annexure P-1], by passing a speaking order [if already not passed], within a period of six weeks positively, from today.

¶25

6. Needless to say that in case representations have

¶26

already been decided, the order on representations/speaking order be conveyed to

¶27

petitioners, within the above period. Notices issued to the respondents shall stand discharged, accordingly.

¶28

¶29

In aforesaid terms, instant petition and all the

¶30

pending miscellaneous application(s). if any, shall stand

¶31

disposed of.

¶32

(Ranjan Sharma) Judge

¶33

September,18 2026 (Anita)

Suman Kumari v. M. Sudha Devi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suman Kumari v. M. Sudha Devi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases