2025:HHC:2637 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition (T) No.12 of 2025 Date of Decision: 10.01.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Roop Chand ……...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. Virender Singh Rathour, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General, for respondents/State. ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 25.07.2023, passed by this Court in CWP(OA) No.5894 of 2019, titled Roop Chand Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and Others, whereby this Court, while disposing of the writ petition, directed respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in light of judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.3841 of 2022, titled Dr. Umesh Kumar Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, decided on 01.01.2020 and judgment dated 01.01.2020, passed by this Court in CWP No.3267 of 2019, titled Ram Krishan Sharma Vs. Accountant General (A&E) H.P. Since no action, whatsoever, came to be taken at the behest of the respondents pursuant to aforesaid direction, present petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings. 2025:HHC:2637 2 2. 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 six weeks from today. 3. Consequently, in view of the 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 six 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. January 10, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (Rajeev Raturi) Judge