IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No.1942 of 2025 Date of Decision: 10.10.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Chandra Vati ……...Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Others …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Vinay Mehta, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of instant execution petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for execution and implementation of judgment dated 03.04.2025, passed by this Court in CWP No.4839 of 2025, whereby this Court passed the following order: “5. Without adverting to the merits of the case, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the case of the petitioner within four weeks from today strictly in terms of the judgment passed by this Court on 14th March, 2024, in CWPOA No. 2782 of 2019, titled as Narender Singh Thakur & Ors. vs. State of H.P. & Ors., by passing a detailed and reasoned order. Needless to say that in case petitioner is found identically situated as the beneficiaries in the case(s) decided vide aforesaid judgment dated 14th March, 2024, the petitioner shall also be extended all such benefits as made available to beneficiaries therein within further period of four weeks. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.” 2 2. Since no action, whatsoever, came to be taken at the behest of the respondents pursuant to aforesaid direction, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings. 3. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, while putting in appearance on behalf of the respondents, states that though he has every reason to presume and believe that by now, order/judgment sought to be executed, must have been complied with in its totality, but if not, same would be definitely complied with within a period of three weeks from today. 4. Consequently, in view of fair stand adopted by the learned Additional Advocate General, this Court sees no reason to keep present petition alive and accordingly, same is disposed of with direction to the respondents to do the needful in terms of judgment sought to be executed, within a period of three weeks, failing which petitioner would be at liberty to get the present petition revived so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken towards the implementation of the order/judgment. October 10, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (Rajeev Raturi) Judge