IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No. 2599 of 2025 Date of Decision: 16.12.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Sunita Pandey and Ors. ……...Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: Mr. Mohit Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of present execution petition, prayer has been made by the petitioners for implementation and execution of order/judgment dated 29.72025, passed by this Court in CWP No.12199 of 2025, titled Sunita Pandey and Ors.. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., whereby afore petition came to be disposed of with a direction to respondent/competent authority to consider and decide representation of the petitioners in light of judgment dated 28.5.2025, passed in CWP No. 2489 of 2018, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors v. Suresh Chand Heer and Ors., within a 2 period of six weeks. Since no action, whatsoever, came to be taken at the behest of the respondents pursuant to aforesaid direction, petitioners have approached this Court in the instant proceedings. 2. Mr. Anish Banshtu, learned Deputy Advocate General, 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. 3. Consequently, in view of the fair stand adopted by the learned Deputy 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 alleged to have been violated within a period of three weeks, failing which petitioners would be at liberty to get the present petition revived so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken towards implementation of the order/judgment. December 16, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge