IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL P RADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.470 of 2025 Date of Decision: 14.08.2025 ___________________________________________________________ Kashmira Devi ……...Petitioner Versus Dr. Abhishek Jain and Others …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? ____________________________________________________________ For the Petitioner: Mr. Devender K. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: 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 respondents. Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, Advocate, for Accountant General. ____________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Though compliance affidavit is stated to have been filed, but the same is not on record. Registry to trace and place the same on record, if in order. 2. During proceedings of the case, Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General has made available copy of compliance affidavit, filed under the signatures of Executive Engineer, Bhoranj Division, HPPWD, Bhoranj, to state that mandate contained in the judgment, alleged to have been violated, has been complied with, subject to outcome of LPA, pending adjudication before the Division Bench of this Court. 2 3. Careful perusal of aforesaid compliance affidavit as well as documents annexed therewith reveals that pursuant to directions contained in the judgment, alleged to have been violated, respondents passed office order dated 18.06.2025, issued under the signatures of Engineer-in-Chief, HPPWD, Shimla, wherein claim of the petitioner for pension/family pension has been considered, subject to the final instructions/guidelines issued by the Government in Balo Devi’s case and the decision of LPA filed in the instant case. The Executive Engineer, Bhoranj Division, HPPWD, Bhoranj, has been also directed to take necessary steps for extending the benefit to the petitioner expeditiously. It also emerges from Para 3 of the compliance affidavit that case for payment of pension stands processed and sent to the office of Accountant General, but the sanction is still awaited. 4. Since it is quite apparent from the aforesaid affidavit that necessary decision has been already taken for implementation of the judgment, alleged to have been violated, subject to outcome of LPA and at present, matter is pending with the office of Accountant General for issuance of pension payment order, no action of respondents can be said to be contumacious. 5. Consequently, in view of the above, present proceedings are closed, however, office of Accountant General, Himachal Pradesh, is directed through Sh. Tek Ram Sharma, Advocate, to take necessary action upon the communication dated 20.06.2025 and issue pension payment 3 order expeditiously, preferably, within a period of four weeks. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to get the present petition revived, in case needful is not done within the stipulated period, enabling this Court to pass appropriate order against the erring officials. Notices discharged. August 14, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (Rajeev Raturi) Judge