IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No.496 of 2024 Date of Decision: 27.05.2025 _______________________________________________________ Ranveer Singh …….Petitioner Versus HRTC & Anr. … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Sat Prakash, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr.Raman Jamalta, Advocate. _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant Execution Petition, prayer has been made on behalf of petitioner for issuance of directions to the respondents to implement/ execute the judgment dated 19.05.2025 passed by this Court in CWP No.3837 of 2025, titled as Ranveer Singh Vs. HRTC & Anr. 2. Careful perusal of aforesaid judgment, sought to be executed in the present proceedings, reveals that this Court, while allowing the writ petition filed by the petitioner, directed respondents to consider and decide the pending representation dated 20.09.2024 (Annexure P-4) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of eight weeks. Since, despite there being specific direction to do the needful, as taken note herein above, respondents failed to 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 comply with the judgment, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings. 3. Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocate, while accepting notice on behalf of the respondents, states that though he has every reason to believe and presume that by now aforesaid orders, sought to be executed, must have been complied with, but if not, same would be complied with within a period of two weeks from today. 4. Consequently, in view of the afore undertaking given by learned counsel for the respondents, this Court sees no reason to keep the present petition alive and as such, same is accordingly disposed of with the direction to the respondents to do the needful, positively within a period of two weeks, if not already done, failing which, petitioner would be at liberty to get the present proceedings revived, so that appropriate action, in accordance with law, is taken towards implementation of the judgment/ order, sought to be executed in the instant proceedings. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge May 27, 2025 (sunil)