IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Ex. Pet (T) No.26 of 2026 Decided on: 03.07.2026 _________________________________________________________________ Naresh Kumar ....Petitioner Versus HPSEBL and Anr. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Arvind Negi, Advocate vice Ms. Jyoti Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Sunita Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Dhananjay Sharma, Advocate foe respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 stands deleted. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Following order was passed in the matter on 17.06.2026:- “Learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.1 submits that cost in terms of the previous order has been paid to the petitioner. Respondent No.1 is stated to have filed the compliance affidavit. It be placed in the case file, if in 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes - 2 - order. A copy thereof was made available for perusal. In terms of the compliance affidavit, the judgment in question has been implemented by issuing office letter dated 06.06.2026. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner makes out a grievance and rightly so that the respondents were not justified in ordering release of benefits to the petitioner on notional basis. In terms of para 14 of the judgment, the petitioner has been held entitled for appointment alongwith all consequential benefits. Confronted with above, at the request of learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.1, one but final opportunity of two weeks is granted to implement the udgment in letter and spirit, failing which respondent No.1 shall remain present in the Court on the next date. List on 03.07.2026.” 2. Pursuant to above, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 has placed on record office letter dated 27.06.2026 alongwith compendium of documents and on that basis submits that the judgment in question now stands implemented and admissible benefits have been released in favour of the petitioner; That some benefits relating to consequent promotion of the petitioner are being processed. The same shall also be finalized within six weeks. 3. In view of the documents on record and the submissions made for the respondent No.1, this execution - 3 - petition to stand disposed of. Liberty, however, is reserved to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy for the redressal of his surviving grievances, if any, in accordance with law. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge July 03, 2026 R.Atal