Surender Kumar Vashisth vs State Of H.P. And Another
2021 Latest Caselaw 3447 HP

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                            Execution Petition No. 11 of 2021
                            Date of Decision: 03.08.2021
    _____________________________________________________




                                                                       .
    Surender Kumar Vashisth                                          ......Petitioner





                                           Versus
    State of H.P. and another.                                    ....Respondents





    Coram
    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting1?





    ________________________________________________________
    For the petitioner:    Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate.

    For the respondents:  Mr. Ajay Vaidya, Sr. Additional Advocate
                       r  General.

    Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

Through Video Conferencing

By way of instant execution petition, prayer has been

made on behalf of the petitioner for issuance of directions to the

respondents to implement/execute the judgment/order dated

08.04.2019, passed by erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal

in OA (M)No. 549 of 2018, titled Surender Kumar Vashisth vs.

State of H.P. and another, whereby learned Tribunal below while

allowing the original application, having been filed by the petitioner,

directed the respondents to modify memorandum dated

29.03.2013 (Annexure P-4) and quashed the order dated

Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment?

23.7.2018. Besides above, learned Tribunal, also directed the

respondents to allow the petitioner to continue in service upto the

age of 60 years. Since, respondents despite there being aforesaid

.

direction issued by erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal, did

not allow the petitioner to remain in service till 60 years, he has

approached this Court in the instant proceedings.

2. Mr. Ajay Vaidya, learned Sr. Additional Advocate

General, while inviting attention of this Court to short reply filed on

behalf of the respondents, contends that after dismissal of SLP( c)

D.No(s) 18076/2019, titled as State of HP & Ors. vs. Krishan

Chand, matter is under active consideration of the Government and

as and when, decision would be taken, necessary orders for

implementation of judgment, sought to be executed, shall be

passed.

3. Having heard learned counsel representing the parties

and perused the material available on record, this Court finds that

judgment sought to be executed in the instant proceedings came to

be passed on the basis of judgment rendered by this Court in CWP

No.1577/2018-H, titled as State of H.P. and Others vs. Krishan

Chand, decided on 5.11.2018. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with

the aforesaid judgment rendered by this Court, respondents-State

though filed SLP, as detailed hereinabove, but same was dismissed

and as such, respondents-State have no option, but to implement the

judgment sought to be executed in the instant proceedings.

4. Faced with aforesaid situation, learned Sr. Additional

.

Advocate General, fairly states that necessary steps for

implementation/execution of the judgment, sought to be executed,

shall be, taken, positively, within a period of four weeks.

5. In view of the aforesaid fair stand adopted by learned Sr.

Additional Advocate General, there appears to be justification to

keep the present petition alive and same is accordingly disposed of

with the direction to the respondents to do the needful

expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks, failing

which, petitioner would be at liberty to get the execution petition

revived, so that appropriate action, in accordance with law, is taken

towards implementation of the judgment/order, sought to be

executed in the instant proceedings.

( Sandeep Sharma ) Judge

3rd August, 2021 (reena)