Munish Patial v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. CWP No. 4271 of 2025 8.9.2025 Present: Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents/State. Compliance affidavit is on record, perusal whereof reveals that in terms of mandate contained in the judgment sought to be complied with, direction contained in the judgment stands complied with in respect of the petitioner, whereas Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, has not issued directions to incorporate the provision with regard to grant of paternity leave to male contract employee. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, states that vide communication dated 26.6.2025, intimation with regard to order stands sent to Worthy Chief Secretary and as such, he has reason to presume and believe that that instructions to incorporate the provision with regard to grant of paternity leave to the male contract employee must have been issued, but if not, same shall be issued expeditiously. In view of the above, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant proceedings and as such, same are closed. September 8, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), manjit Judge