IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No.380 of 2025 Date of Decision: 18.07.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Grammen Mukti Vidhyalya Shiksha Sansthan ……...Petitioner Versus Ministry of Human Resource Development and Others …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Umesh Kanwar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Virbahadur Verma, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Ms. Srishti Verma, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Ms. Aanchal Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Having carefully perused objections to the execution petition filed at the behest of respondent No.2, this Court finds that mandate contained in the judgment, sought to be executed, stands duly complied with. 2. Pursuant to directions passed by this Court, respondent No.2 has included the name of the petitioner herein in the list of associated member i.e. Council of Board of School Education in India. Though factum with regard to inclusion of name of the petitioner has not been refuted by learned counsel representing the petitioner, but he 2 states that no serial number has been given to petitioner, as a result thereof, there can be lot of confusion, however, such submission of him has been seriously opposed by Ms. Srishti Verma, learned counsel representing the respondent No.2. She states that though pursuant to order passed by this Court, name of the petitioner-Association has been included in the list of Council of Board of School Education in India, but since petitioner-Association has been recognized in the year 2019 and respondents have displayed the name of the petitioner in the list as well as in the website, but purposely has not been given serial number, because petitioner is not a member of Council of Board of School Education (for short, ‘COBSE’). Besides above, learned counsel representing the respondent No.2 also apprised this Court that taking undue advantage of order passed by this Court, petitioner has been writing to various Board of School Educations that direction has been passed by Court to COBSE to include the name of member and as such, now their name stands included in the list, whereas, petitioner name has been included in the list for very limited period, that too in order to protect the interest of such students, who had passed their 10th and 10+2 examination held from 01.12.2017 to 05.02.2019. 3. 3. Since name of the petitioner has been also included in the list of COBSE and same is also available on the website, this Court 3 need not go into that aspect of the matter and as such, present petition is disposed of being fully satisfied. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in the appropriate Court of law, qua the surviving grievance, if any. July 18, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (Rajeev Raturi) Judge