Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 12824 (HP)

JOGI RAM BHARDWAJ v. STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CMP/10321/2026 · 2026-06-23

Sandeep Sharma

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Jogi Ram Bhardwaj v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. CMP No. 10321 of 2026 in Execution Petition No. 2179 of 2025 23.6.2026 Present: Mr. A.K. Gupta, Advocate, for the non- applicant/petitioner. Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for the applicants/respondents. By way of instant application, prayer has been made by the applicants/respondents for modification of order dated 12.12.2025 passed by this Court in Execution Petition No.2179 of 2025, which came to be disposed of on the basis of communication dated 10.12.2025, issued under the signature of ADG-cum-Director Fire Services, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, stating therein that judgment sought to be executed shall be implemented subject to outcome of LPA. It is averred in the application and further argued by learned Advocate General that while placing on record communication dated 10.12.2025, it was not the intention of the applicants/respondents that judgment sought to be executed shall be implemented, rather through afore application factum with regard to filing of the LPA against the judgment sought to be executed was intended to be conveyed. However, having carefully perused afore communication as well as finding recorded in the order sought to be executed, this Court is not persuaded to agree with learned Advocate General. Through afore communication dated 10.12.2025, this Court came to be apprised with regard to intention of the department concerned for impleadment of the judgment sought to be executed subject to outcome of the LPA. Since order sought to be executed was passed on the written instructions, as detailed herein above, there appears to be no justification for this Court to recall the same, rather appropriate remedy, if any, at this stage, available to the applicants/respondents is to file application for early hearing of LPA before the Hon’ble Principal Division Bench. Accordingly, present application is dismissed. June 23, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma), manjit Judge