Himachal Pradesh High Court
Hans Raj vs Hrtc And Anr on 28 December, 2020
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Execution Petition No.484 of 2020
Date of Decision: 28.12.2020
____________________________________________________
.
Hans Raj ......Petitioner
Versus
HRTC and Anr. ....Respondents
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting1?
____________________________________________________
For the petitioner: Mr. Ashish Verma, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Vikas Rajput, Advocate.
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)
By way of present execution petition filed under Clause 16(1) of the HP High Court Writ Rules, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for implementation and execution of order/judgment dated 26.12.2018, passed by the Erstwhile HP State Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 7623 of 2018, 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 three 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 respondents 1 Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment? ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2020 20:15:55 :::HCHP 2 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 six 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 six 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.
28th December, 2020 ( Sandeep Sharma )
(reena) Judge
::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2020 20:15:55 :::HCHP