IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No.455 of 2025 Date of Decision: 20.06.2025 _______________________________________________________ Neelam Sharma …….Petitioner Versus S.D. Sen Sec School & Ors. … Respondent s Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Vishal Singh Thakur & Mr. Shagun Sharma, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ajit Pal Singh Jaswal, Advocate, for respondent No. 1. Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No. 2 to 4-State. _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant Execution Petition, prayer has been made on behalf of petitioner for execution and implementation of judgment dated 07.11.2024 passed by this Court in CWP No.861 of 2024, titled as SD Senior Secondary School Shimla Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. alongwith connected writ petitions bearing Nos. 854, 857 to 860, 862 to 865, 872 to 874, 3088 to 3091, 3477 to 3479, 3481, 3483, 3901 and 3903 of 2024, whereby this Court, while dismissing the petition filed by the respondents-SD Senior Secondary School Shimla, upheld the impugned order passed 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 by the Appellate Authority under Payment of Gratuity Act. Though judgment, sought to be executed, never came to be laid challenge by way of LPA, same has attained finality, but the amount awarded by the Appellate Authority is not being released, as such, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, for execution of judgment dated 07.11.2024. 2. Pursuant to notices issued in the instant proceedings, Mr. Ajit Pal Singh Jaswal, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of respondent-S.D. Sen Sec School. Mr. Neeraj Gupta, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent-S.D. Sen Sec School, on instructions, states that though amount lying deposited with the Registry of this Court can be ordered to be released in favour of the petitioner, but while doing so, amount, if any, deposited in excess be ordered to be refunded in favour of respondent-S.D. Sen Sec School. 3. Mr. Vishal Singh Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner, fairly admits that in terms of order passed by Appellate Authority, which ultimately came to be upheld by way of judgment, sought to be executed, petitioner herein apart from principal amount, has been held entitled to interest @ 9%, meaning thereby, petitioner herein, over and above, amount of payment of gratuity has been entitled to 9% interest. 3 4. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with a direction to the Registry of this Court to release principal amount awarded by the Appellate Authority in favour of the petitioner alongwith 9% interest. Amount deposited over and above the admissible amount shall be released in favour of the respondent- S.D. Sen Sec School. Learned counsel for the parties undertake to make available bank details of the petitioner as well as respondent- S.D. Sen Sec School within one week to the Registry of this Court, enabling it to do the needful in terms of instant order. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge June 20, 2025 (sunil)