Himachal Pradesh High Court
Kuldeep Singh vs Hrtc And Ors on 20 July, 2020
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Execution Petition No.287 of 2020
Date of Decision: 20.7.2020
_______________________________________________________
.
Kuldeep Singh ......Petitioner.
Versus
HRTC and Ors. ....Respondents.
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting1?
For the petitioner: Mr. H.R. Bhardwaj, Advocate, through Video
Conferencing.
For the respondents: Mr. Vikas Rajput, Advocate, through Video
Conferencing.
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)
By way of present execution petition filed under Clause 16 of the HP High Court Writ Rules, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for implementation and execution of order/judgment dated 10.5.2019, passed by the Erstwhile HP State Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 1908 of 2019, whereby the Tribunal below having taken note of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that his case is squarely covered by the judgment dated 17.7.2014, passed in CWP No. 3050 of 2014, titled Nek Ram v. State of HP and Ors, directed the respondents to consider the case of the applicant strictly in light of aforesaid judgment and grant similar benefit to him, if he is found similarly situate within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of the order. Since no action, whatsoever, came to be taken at the behest of the Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment? ::: Downloaded on - 20/07/2020 20:21:45 :::HCHP -2- respondents pursuant to aforesaid direction issued by the Tribunal, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings.
2. Mr. Vikas Rajput, learned counsel for the respondents states .
that though he has every reason to presume 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.
3. Consequently, in view of the fair stand adopted by the learned counsel for the respondents, 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 against the erring officials.
20th July, 2020 ( Sandeep Sharma ),
manjit Judge.
::: Downloaded on - 20/07/2020 20:21:45 :::HCHP