IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.617 of 2024 Date of Decision: 10.1.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Veer Singh alias Amar Nath ……...Petitioner Versus Onkar Chand Sharma and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Sanjay Bhardwaj, 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. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Reply filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 4 reveals that judgment alleged to have been violated has not been complied with till date on account of pendency of LPA filed by the respondents, laying therein challenge to judgment alleged to have been violated. 2. While making available copy of judgment dated 6.12.2024, passed by Division Bench of this Court in CMP(M) No. 1922 of 2024 and LPA No. 437 of 2024 (State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. v. Veer Singh alias Amar Nath), learned counsel for the petitioner states that LPAs referred in the reply already stand dismissed. If it is so, respondents have 2 no option but to comply with the mandate contained in the judgment alleged to have been violated. Otherwise also, implementation of judgment alleged to have been violated cannot be delayed till the time, same is, varied, modified or set-aside by the superior court of law. 3. Faced with aforesaid situation, learned Additional Advocate General undertakes to comply with the judgment alleged to have been violated within a period of six weeks. 4. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid undertaking given by the learned Additional Advocate General, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant petition and accordingly, same is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to do the needful within a period of six weeks, failing which petitioner would be at liberty to get the present petition revived so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken against the erring officials. January 10, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge