IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No.1528 of 2025 Date of Decision: 25.08.2025 _______________________________________________________ Gauri Shankar Sharma …….Petitioner Versus HPTDCL … Respondent _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Om Parkash Goel, Advocate. For the Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Kaul, Advocate, vice Ms. Maheshwari Sharma, Advocate. _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant Execution Petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for issuance of directions to the respondent for implementation and execution of the order/judgment dated 07.10.2023 passed by this Court in CWP No.5737 of 2023, titled as Sh. Gauri Shankar Sharma Vs. HPTDC. 2. Careful perusal of aforesaid order/judgment, sought to be executed in the present proceedings, reveals that this Court, while disposing of the writ petition filed by the petitioner, directed the respondent to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2740 of 2022, titled as Mudit Kumar Vs. HPTDC within four weeks. Since, despite there being specific direction to do the needful, as taken note 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 herein above, respondent failed to comply with the judgment, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings. 3. Ms. Sheetal Kaul, Advocate, while accepting notice on behalf of the respondent, 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 three weeks from today. 4. Consequently, in view of the afore undertaking given by learned counsel for the respondent, this Court sees no reason to keep the present petition alive and as such, same is accordingly disposed of with the direction to the respondent to do the needful, positively within a period of three weeks from today, 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 August 25, 2025 (sunil)