2026:HHC:39794 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No.1146 of 2026 Decided on: 17 th September, 2026 ___________________________________________________________________ Mohd. Islam ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & others ...Respondents _____________________________________________________________________ Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioner: Mr. Bonit Prakash, Advocate vice Mr. A.K. Gupta, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Amandeep Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3-State. Ms. Rangil Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.4. Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge (Oral) Learned Additional Advocate General has produced a communication dated 03.09.2026, office order dated 19.08.2026, passed by the Divisional Forest Officer, Nahan Forest Division, Nahan, H.P. and copy of instructions dated 14.02.2019, passed by the Secretary (Finance) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, which are taken on record. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. A perusal of the office order dated 19.08.2026 reveals that the case of the petitioner was considered and as the service credentials of the petitioner do not match or satisfy the eligibility criteria outlined in Government instructions dated 14.02.2019, his claim for counting/benefiting the disputed two years of daily wage service was rejected. 3. This Court while disposing of the writ petition on 27.11.2025, passed in CWP No.18317 of 2025, titled, Mohd. Islam vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, had only given a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of the decision passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.6309 of 2017, titled, Sunder Singh vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others. 4. Since the mandate contained in the judgment sought to be executed has been complied with, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the present execution petition and the same is closed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to avail appropriate remedy to assail the office order dated 19.08.2026, passed by the Divisional Forest Officer, Nahan Forest Division, 3 Nahan, H.P., in accordance with law. 5. The petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 17 th September, 2026 ( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) (ankit) Judge