Disposed

Devi Singh v. Abhishek Jain and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC18 Sept 2026COPC/1362/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a contempt petition alleging non-compliance with a High Court order granting a higher pay scale. The Additional Advocate General produced an office order dated 22.05.2026 showing the petitioner's case had been accepted and the pay scale granted subject to the outcome of a related appeal. The petitioner's counsel acknowledged compliance, and the court disposed of the petition as nothing remained to be adjudicated.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of as the order dated 01.01.2026 was found to be fully complied with.

Devi Singh Vs Abhishek Jain and Others — Service and Employment | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

2026:HHC:40086

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA

¶3

COPC No. 1362/2026 Decided on: 18.09.2026

¶4

Devi Singh …..Petitioner Versus Dr. Abhishek Jain & ors. ….Respondents ______________________________________________________________

¶5

Coram:

¶6

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge.

¶7

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶8

For the Petitioner: Mr. Prashant Manhans, Advocate.

¶9

For the Respondents: Mr. Baldev Singh Negi, Addl. A.G.

¶10

Romesh Verma, Judge (oral)

¶11

The present petition has been filed alleging noncompliance of order, dated 01.01.2026, as passed by this Court in CWP No. 20857/2025.

¶12

2 Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record copy of office order, dated 22.05.2026, whereby case of the petitioner has been considered and accepted, relevant portion whereof reads as under:-

¶13

“As order passed by the Hon'ble High Court and as per approval received from the Govt., vide their letter dated

¶14

1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

¶15

¶16

01.11.2025 and 04.04.2026, the petitioners are allowed higher pay scale in the concerned level of pay matrix after completion of two years regular service subject to the final outcome of LPA filed by the State in Mohit Sharma case. The DDO concerned is hereby directed to fix the pay of the petitioner and release the arrear as per Finance Department instruction from time to time and compliance report sent to this Directorate immediately. However, an undertaking to this effect may be obtained from the petitioner that the overpayment if any, found, in later stage shall be recovered from them accordingly. The entry be also made in the service book of individual concerned. May inform the parties accordingly.”

¶17

The learned counsel for the petitioner has

¶18

acknowledged the aforesaid fact.

¶19

Since the order in question stands fully complied with, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant petition and the same is closed. The petition stands disposed of.

¶20

18.09.2026 (pankaj)

¶21

(Romesh Verma) Judge

Devi Singh v. Abhishek Jain and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devi Singh v. Abhishek Jain 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