IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No.2420 of 2025 Date of Decision: 03.12.2025 _______________________________________________________ Dinesh Kumar …….Petitioner Versus The Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited & Anr. … Respondents ______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Babita Chauhan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Virender Singh Kanwar, Advocate. _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant Execution Petition filed under Rule 16 of the H.P. High Court Original Side Rules, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for issuance of directions to the respondents to implement/ execute the order/judgment dated 18.06.2025 passed by this Court in CWP No. 9619 of 2025, titled Dinesh Kumar vs. Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited and another. 2. Careful perusal of aforesaid order/judgment, sought to be executed in the instant proceedings, reveals that this Court having taken note of the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner that case of the petitioner is squarely covered by judgment 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 dated 16.04.2025, rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos. 10719-10720 of 2025, titled as The Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited and another vs. Nanak Chand and others alongwith connected matters, disposed of the petition with a direction to the respondent to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of aforesaid judgment. Since, despite there being specific direction to do the needful, as taken note hereinabove, respondents have failed to do the needful, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings. 3. Mr. Virender Singh Kanwar, learned counsel representing the respondents, while accepting notice on behalf of the respondents, states that though she has every reason to believe and presume that by now aforesaid judgment/ order 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 fair statement made by learned counsel for the respondents, this Court sees no reason to keep the present petition alive and as such, same is accordingly disposed of with the direction to the respondents to do the needful in terms of order/judgment dated 18.06.2025, passed by this Court in CWP No. 9619 of 2025, positively within a period of three weeks, if not already done, failing which, petitioner would be at liberty to get 3 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 December 03,2025 (shankar)