Himachal Pradesh High Court
(By Sh. Rakesh Kumar Sharma vs State Of on 11 March, 2022
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
ON THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
.
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHARMA
EXECUTION PETITON (TRIBUNAL) No. 23 OF 2022
Between:
RAVINDER KUMAR SHARMA SON OF
SH. VED PARKASH, RESIDENT OF
QUARTER NO.32-AA, BBMB COLONY,
NANGAL, DISTRICT ROPAR.
(BY SH. RAKESH KUMAR SHARMA, ADVOCATE)
AND
r ....PETITIONER
1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH THROUGH
SECRETARY (PERSONNEL) TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH.
2. THE STATE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
THROUGH ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF
SOCIAL WELFARE (CHAIRMAN EX-OFFICIO)
SHIMLA-2.
3. HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY
BOARD LIMITED, KUMAR HOUSE, SHIMLA-
171004(THROUGH ITS MANAGING
DIRECTOR).
4. DIRECTOR (PERSONNEL) HIMACHAL
PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
LIMITED.
5. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HPSEB, BILASPUR,
DISTRICT BILASPUR, H.P.
....RESPONDENTS
(BY MR. SUDHIR BHATNAGAR, MR. DESH RAJ
THAKUR AND MR. ARVIND SHARMA,
ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERALS WITH MR.
KAMAL KISHORE SHARMA, MR. NARENDER
::: Downloaded on - 11/03/2022 20:16:33 :::CIS
THAKUR AND MR. GAURAV SHARMA, DEPUTY
ADVOCATE GENERALS, FOR R-1)
(BY. MR. LAKSHAY THAKUR, ADVOCATE, FOR R-
.
3 TO 5)
____________________________________________________________
This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court passed the following:
ORDER
By way of instant Execution Petition filed under Rule 16
(1) 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
4.10.2018, passed by erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal in
OA No.6557 of 2016 titled as Ravinder Kumar Sharma Vs. State of
Himachal Pradesh and others.
2. Careful perusal of aforesaid order/judgment
(Annexure P-1) alleged to have been violated, reveals that 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 by the judgment dated 10th January, 2018 passed
by Tribunal below in OA No.1004 of 2015, titled Krishan Chand 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. 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 Krishan Chand case (supra), petitioner has approached this Court in
.
the instant proceedings.
3. Mr. Lakshay Thakur, learned counsel representing
respondents No. 3 to 5 while accepting notice on behalf of aforesaid
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 two weeks from today.
4. Consequently, in view of the fair statement made by
learned counsel 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 4.10.2018, passed by
learned Tribunal below in OA No. 6557 of 2016, positively within a
period of two 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.
11th March,2022 (Sandeep Sharma),
(shankar) Judge
