IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No. 2663 of 2025 Date of Decision: 19.12.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Ms. Twinkle 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. Onkar Jairath, 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 3.9.2025, passed by this Court in CWP No. 14051 of 2025, titled Ms. Twinkle 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 representations of the petitioners in light of judgment dated 29.11.2024 passed in CWP No. 1638 of 2024, titled as Mohit Sharma and Anr. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., within a 2 period of four 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 19, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge