2025:HHC:24317 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Ex. Petition No.77 of 2025 Decided on: 25.07.2025 __________________________________________________________ Sanjay Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh ...Respondents and others Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting?. For the petitioner: Mr. Tarun K. Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Raj Negi, Deputy Advocate General for respondents No. 1 to 3-State. Mr. L.S. Mehta, Advocate, for respondent No.4. Sandeep Sharma, Judge [Oral] While placing on record communication dated NIL, issued under the signatures of Director School Education, Himachal Pradesh, which is taken on record, learned Deputy Advocate General submits that mandate contained in the judgment, sought to be executed has been duly complied with. 2. Perusal of the communication as well as 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2025:HHC:24317 - 2 - documents annexed therewith, specifically the office order dated 28.03.2025, this Court finds that respondents after having considered the representations made by the petitioners in light of the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No. 3435 of 2020, titled as Satish Kumar & Ors Vs. State of H.P. & Ors alongwith CWPOA No.6850 of 2020, titled Milat Ram and others Vs State of H.P. and others have rejected the representation. 3. Though, Mr. Tarun Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner attempted to argue that compliance is not in conformity with the mandate contained in the judgment sought to be executed but we are not persuaded to agree within him. 4. Needless to say, that execution proceedings are meant to ensure execution of the order/judgment in accordance with law and correctness of order passed in purported compliance thereof cannot be looked into in these proceedings, rather same is required to be challenged by filing substantive petition before the competent court of law. Consequently, in view of the above, present 2025:HHC:24317 - 3 - petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings before appropriate Court of law. (Sandeep Sharma) Judge (Ranjan Sharma) Judge July 25, 2025 [himani/shivender]