Chhotu Ram vs State Of H.P. And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 1475 HP

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
                        Execution Petition (T) No. 452 of 2020
                                     Decided on: March 1, 2021
    ____________________________________________________________




                                                                      .
    Chhotu Ram                                      ...Petitioner





                                  Versus
    State of H.P. and others                      ...Respondents
    ____________________________________________________________





    Coram
    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting1?
    ____________________________________________________________
    For the petitioner:     Mr. Ajay Shandil, Advocate.





    For the respondents:           Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar and Mr.
                                   Arvind     Sharma,      Additional
                                   Advocates General with Mr. Kunal
                                   Thakur, Deputy Advocate General.


                THROUGH VIDEO-CONFERENCING
    ____________________________________________________________
    Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

By way of instant petition filed under Rule 16(I) to

16(III) of HP High Court Writ Rules and Orders, 1997 (as

amended upto date) prayer has been made for the execution of

order dated 11.1.2019 passed by erstwhile Himachal Pradesh

Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 218 of 2019 titled Chhotu

Ram vs. The State of H.P. and others, whereby learned Tribunal,

having taken note of the statement made by learned Counsel

appearing for the petitioner that his case is squarely covered by

judgment dated 10.5.2018 rendered by this Court in CWP No.

3111 of 2016, State of H.P. and Ors. vs. Sh. Ashwani Kumar,

disposed of the Original Application with a direction to the

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

respondents to extend benefit of aforesaid judgment to the

petitioner within two months from the date of production of a

.

certified copy of order, subject to his being similarly situate

person. Since the respondents failed to comply the aforesaid

order passed by the erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative

Tribunal, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant

proceedings seeking execution of the order in question.

2. Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate

General, states that though he has every reason to believe that

the order in question stands implemented, but if not, same

would be complied with, within a period of four weeks.

3. Consequently, in view of the fair stand taken by

learned Additional Advocate General, this Court sees no reason

to keep the present petition alive and same is disposed of with a

direction to the respondents to do the needful in terms of order

in question, within four weeks, failing which petitioner would be

at liberty to get the present petition revived, so that appropriate

steps towards execution of the order in question are taken.

Petition stands disposed of in above terms.

(Sandeep Sharma) Judge March 1, 2021 (Vikrant)