Date Of Decision: 10.3.202 vs State Of H.P.& Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 1984 HP

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
                              SHIMLA

                                                          Execution Petition No.48 of 2021




                                                                                      .

                                        Date of Decision: 10.3.2021
    ____________________________________________________________
    Bihari Lal                                     ......Petitioner





                                          Versus
    State of H.P.& others                      ...... Respondents
    ________________________________________________________
    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.





    Whether approved for reporting? 1
    For the Petitioner                     :       Mr. A.K.Gupta, Advocate.
    For the Respondents : Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar and Mr.

                          Arvind Sharma, Additional Advocate

                          Generals, with Mr. Kunal Thakur,
                          Deputy Advocate General.
    Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral):

By way of instant Execution Petition filed under Rule 16

of the H.P. High Court Original Side Rules, prayer has been made

on behalf of the petitioner for issuance of directions to the

respondents to implement/ execute the judgment/order dated

20.6.2018, passed by erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal

in OA(D) No.178 of 2018, titled as Bihari Lal versus State of

Himachal Pradesh & others.

2. Careful perusal of aforesaid order/judgment

(Annexure E-1) alleged to have been violated, reveals that

Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

learned Tribunal below having taken note of the statement made

by learned counsel representing the petitioner that the case of

.

the petitioner is squarely covered under the judgment dated

30.6.2016, passed by learned Tribunal below in OA No.412 of

2016, titled Ashwani Kumar versus The State of Himachal

Pradesh and others , disposed of the original application with a

direction to the respondents / competent authority to grant

benefit of aforesaid judgment to the petitioner, if he is found to

be similarly situate, within a period of three months from the

date of production of certified copy of the order/judgment. Since,

despite there being specific direction to do the needful within a

period of three months, respondents have failed to grant the

benefit to the petitioner in terms of the judgment passed by

Tribunal below in Ashwani Kumar's case supra, petitioner

has approached this Court in the instant proceedings.

3. Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar learned Additional Advocate

General while accepting notice on behalf of the respondents,

states that though he has every reason to believe and presume

that by now aforesaid judgment/ order alleged to have been

violated, must have been complied with, but if not, same would

be complied with within a period of four weeks from today.

4. Consequently, in view of the fair statement made by

learned Additional Advocate General representing the

.

respondents, this Court sees no reason to keep the present

petition alive and as such, same is accordingly disposed of with

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

judgment/order dated 20.6.2018 passed by learned Tribunal

below in OA (D) No. 178 of 2018, positively within a period of

four weeks, if not already done, failing which, petitioner would

be at 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 10th March, 2021 (shankar)