Date Of Decision: 19.10.2023 vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 16907 HP

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                                                   Ex.PT No. 130 of 2023
                                           Date of Decision: 19.10.2023
_____________________________________________________________________
Smt. Gurpiari Devi
                                                               .........Petitioner
                                          Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.
                                                             .......Respondents

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?

For the petitioner:       Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.
                     Verma, Additional Advocates General with Ms.
                     Sunaina and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocates
                     General.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

By way of present execution petition, prayer has been made by

the petitioner for implementation and execution of order/judgment dated

23.8.2022, passed by this Court in CWPOA No. 4111 of 2020, titled

Gurpiari Devi . v. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, whereby this Court

disposed of the aforesaid writ petition with direction to the respondents to

consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgment dated

1.12.2021 passed by this Court in CWPOA No. 1833 of 2020, titled as

Asha Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., within six weeks.

Since no action, whatsoever, came to be taken at the behest of the

respondents pursuant to aforesaid directions, petitioner has approached

this Court in the instant proceedings.

2. Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General, states

that though he has every reason to presume and believe that by now,

order/judgment alleged to have been violated must have been complied

with in its totality, but if not, same would be definitely complied with within

a period of two weeks from today.

3. Consequently, in view of the fair stand adopted by the learned

Additional Advocate General, this Court sees no reason to keep present

petition alive and accordingly, same is disposed of with direction to the

respondents to do the needful in terms of judgment alleged to have been

violated within a period of two weeks, failing which petitioner would be at

liberty to get the present petition revived so that appropriate action in

accordance with law is taken towards the implementation of the

order/judgment.

October 19, 2023                                        (Sandeep Sharma),
     (manjit)                                             Judge