Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8649 (HP)

SAVITA SHARMA v. STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

EX.PT/33/2025 · 2025-07-30

Sandeep Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No. 33 of 2025 Date of Decision: 30.7.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Savita Sharma ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Anuj Nag, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 to 5. Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.6. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) While placing on record communication dated 29.7.2025, issued under the signature of Director of School Education, Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General, states that in terms of order dated 4.6.2025, Principal, Government Senior Secondary School, Bhawarna District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, has forwarded case of the petitioner to the office of Accountant General vide letter dated 17.6.2025. 2 2. Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General states that in view of the above, nothing remains to be done by the respondents- State, but appropriate action is now required to be taken by respondent No.6. Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6 fairly states that needful to issue PPO shall be done expeditiously, preferably, within three weeks. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.4 to ensure that PPO, authorizing thereby pension of the petitioner be issued within three weeks, failing which petitioner would be at liberty to file appropriate application for revival of the petition so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken towards execution and implementation of the judgment/order sought to be executed. July 30, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge