Yogender Singh vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 3308 HP

CMP-T No.2136 of 2020

.

30.7.2021 Present: Mr. Dalip K. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, Mr. Desh Raj Thakur Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Nareder Thakur, Deputy Advocates General, for the respondents.

(Through Video Conferencing)

By way of instant application, prayer has been made

on behalf of the applicant/petitioner for revival of execution petition

bearing No. 49 of 2019, decided on 10.12.2019. Perusal of aforesaid

judgment passed by this Court reveals that execution petition No. 49

of 2019 having been filed by the applicant/petitioner came to be

decided on the basis of undertaking given by the learned Additional

Advocate General that order dated 15.05.2019 passed by the H.P.

Administrative Tribunal, Shimla in OA No. 941 of 2016, titled as

Yogender Singh Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, if not

already implemented shall be positively implemented within a period

of 10 days. Since, despite there being aforesaid undertaking given to

this Court, respondents failed to comply with the aforesaid directions

issued by this Court applicant/plaintiff has approached this Court in

the instant proceedings for revival of execution proceedings.

Mr. Dalip K. Sharma, learned counsel representing the

applicant-petitioner states that case of the petitioner is not being

decided by the respondent on the ground that judgment passed by

H.P. Administrative Tribunal in Hero Devi's case has not attained

finality, whereas the judgment passed in Hero Devi's case stand duly

complied with. He further states that SLP having been filed by the non

applicant-respondent against the judgment passed in Hero Devi's

case has been also dismissed. Mr. Desh Raj Thakur, learned Additional

Advocate General states that SLP filed against the order rejecting

prayer to grant interim stay against the judgment in Hero Devi's case

.

has been dismissed but main writ petition is yet pending. Since the

judgment/order dated 15.5.2019 passed in OA No. 941 of 2016 has

been not stayed till date, respondents have no option but to

implement the same. Faced with the aforesaid situation, learned

Additional Advocate General prays for and is granted ten days time

to have instructions. This court hopes and trusts that by the next date

of hearing, judgment alleged to have been violated, shall be

implemented, failing which respondents shall remain present in the

Court on next date of hearing.

List on 16.08.2021.

    30th July, 2021                                 (Sandeep Sharma),
       (veena)                                           Judge