Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 15682 (HP)

MANJULA THAKUR v. THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER

EX.P./568/2025 · 2025-06-30

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Ex. Pet. No.568 of 2025 Decided on: 30th June, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Manjula Thakur …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Tek Chand, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Following order was passed in the matter on 25.06.2025:- “Mr. Devesh Kumar, Principal Secretary (Finance), and Mr. Saurabh Jassal, Special Secretary (Finance) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, have attended the hearing. The concerned officials have assured to redress the grievance not only of the petitioner in this case but also to look into the larger issue of compliance with the judgment rendered in CWP No. 1638 of 2024 (Mohit Sharma and Anr. vs. State of H.P. and Others), decided on 29.11.2024, by issuing appropriate orders to all the concerned. Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record copy of office communication dated 25.06.2025 from Under Secretary (P&S) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, in terms of which decision shall be implemented by 28.06.2025. List on 30.06.2025.” 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes 2 2. Pursuant to above order, learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record office instructions dated 27.06.2025 from the Controller, Printing & Stationery Department, Himachal Pradesh alongwith copy of order dated 26.06.2025 passed in the case of the petitioner. 3. In view of above, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this execution petition be closed as the judgment in question now stands complied with, however, liberty be reserved to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy in accordance with law for the redressal of her surviving grievances, if any. Granting such permission, the present execution petition is disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua June 30, 2025 Judge Mukesh