IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No.1992 of 2026 Date of Decision: 7.9.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Daulat Ram ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Bonit Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for respondents No. 1 to 3. Ms. Nandita, Advocate, vice Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Advcate, for respondent No.4. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of present execution petition, prayer has been made by the petitioner for implementation and execution of order/judgment dated 23.4.2025, passed by this Court in CWP No. 6391 of 2025, titled Daulat Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., whereby afore petition came to be disposed of with a direction to respondent/competent authority to consider and decide representation of the petitioner in light of judgment passed by the Principal Division Bench of this court in CWP No. 6443 of 2 2021 titled as Babu Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., within a period of four weeks. Since no action, whatsoever, came to be taken at the behest of the respondents pursuant to aforesaid direction, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents state that though they have every reason to presume and believe that by now, order/judgment sought to be executed, must have been complied with in its totality, but if not, same would be definitely complied with within a period of three weeks from today. 3. Consequently, in view of the fair stand adopted by the learned counsel for the respondents, this Court sees no reason to keep the present petition alive and accordingly, same is disposed of with direction to the respondents to do the needful in terms of judgment alleged to have been violated within a period of three weeks, failing which petitioner would be at liberty to get the present petition revived so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken towards implementation of the order/judgment. September 7, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge