IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No.67 of 2026 Date of Decision: 8.1.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Roop Lal and Ors. ……...Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: Mr. Hirdaya Ram, Mr. Suresh Singh Saini and Ms. Sonia Saini, Advocates. 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 petitioners for implementation and execution of order/judgment dated 25.7.2025, passed by this Court in CWP No.11997 of 2025, titled Roop Lal and Ors. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., whereby afore petition came to be disposed of with a direction to respondents/competent authority consider and decide case of the petitioners in light of judgment dated 21.3.2024, passed in CWP No. 8148 of 2022, titled as Yashwant Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., within a period of six 2 weeks. Since no action, whatsoever, came to be taken at the behest of the respondents pursuant to aforesaid direction, petitioners have 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 four 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 four weeks, failing which petitioners 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