IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No. 2375 of 2025 Date of Decision: 24.11.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Dhano ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Sat Prakash, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 4. Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.5. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of present execution petition, prayer has been made by the petitioner for implementation and execution of order/judgment dated 30.5.2025, passed by this Court in CWP No.9057 of 2025, titled Dhano 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 petitioner in light of judgment dated 11.10.2023 passed by Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 196 of 2022, titled Roop Lal v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., within a period of 2 six weeks. 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. 2. Mr. Ravi Chauhan, 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 petitioner 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. November 24, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge