IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No.22 of 2026 Date of Decision: 8.1.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Monika Rani ……...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. Vinod Chauhan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of present execution petition, prayer has been made by the petitioner for implementation and execution of order/judgment dated 17.9.2025, passed by this Court in CWP No.14997 of 2025, titled Narinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Anr., whereby afore petition came to be disposed of with a direction to respondents/competent authority consider and decide representation of the petitioner in light of judgment dated 29.11.2024, rendered in CWP No. 1638 of 2024, titled as Mohit Sharma and Anr. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., within a 2 period of four weeks. Since no action, whatsoever, came to be taken at the behest of the respondents pursuant to aforesaid direction, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings. 2. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the respondents, states that though he has every reason to presume and believe that by now, order/judgment sought to be executed, must have been complied with in its totality, but if not, same would be definitely complied with within a period of three weeks from today. 3. Consequently, in view of the fair stand adopted by Additional Advocate General, this Court sees no reason to keep present petition alive and accordingly, same is disposed of with direction to the respondents to do the needful in terms of judgment alleged to have been violated within a period of three weeks, failing which petitioner would be at liberty to get the present petition revived so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken towards implementation of the order/judgment. January 8, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge