Surender Kumar Vashisth vs State Of H.P. And Another
2021 Latest Caselaw 190 HP

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                            Execution Petition No. 11 of 2021
                            Date of Decision: 05.01.2021
    _____________________________________________________




                                                                       .
    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:r           Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate.

    For the respondents:  Mr. Ajay Vaidya, Sr. Additional Advocate
                          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 to the extent that the benefit of enhancement of

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

retirement age is also extended to the hearing impaired also to

which category the applicant belongs from 58 to 60 years as

specified under Section 2(1) of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal

.

Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act,

1995.

2. Having heard learned Sr. Additional Advocate General

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

aforesaid judgment rendered by Tribunal below was laid challenge

before the Division Bench of this Court by way of CWP No. 1577 of

2018, but the same was dismissed vide judgment dated 5.11.2018.

Though, aforesaid judgment passed by the Division Bench of this

Court was taken in appeal before the Hon'ble Apex Court, but the

same was also dismissed.

3. Otherwise also, perusal of the reply filed by the

respondents clearly reveals that judgment sought to be

implemented/executed in the case at hand was not being

implemented on account of pendency of appeal before the Hon'ble

Apex Court. Apart from above, another ground, which has been

raised for not implementing the judgment sought to be executed in

the instant proceedings is that Government has already withdrawn

notification. Since, appeal having been filed by the State has been

dismissed by Hon'ble Apex Court, judgment sought to be executed

in the instant proceedings has attained finality and as such,

respondents have no option, but to implement the same.

4. Faced with aforesaid situation, learned Sr. Additional

.

Advocate General prays for and is granted 6 weeks' time to do the

needful in terms of judgment sought to be executed in the instant

proceedings. Having taken note of aforesaid undertaking given by

learned Sr. Additional Advocate General, there appears to be no

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 six weeks,

failing which, petitioner would beat liberty to get the present

proceedings 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

5th January, 2021 (reena)