AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
4 paragraphs · 250 wordsSandeep Sharma, J
By way of instant petition filed under Rule 16 of HP Hon'ble Court (Original Side) Rules, 1997, prayer has been made for the execution of order dated 18.3.2019 passed by erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in OA(D) No. 4 of 2017 titled Sunil Kumar vs. The State of H.P. and others, whereby learned Tribunal, disposed of the Original Application with a direction to the applicant to file a comprehensive representation to the respondents and respondents were further directed to decide the same after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, by 30th June 2019. Since no action came to be taken in the matter after lapse of considerable period, petitioner has filed the instant petition for execution of order in question.
Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the respondents, states that though he has every reason to believe that the order in question stands implemented, but if not, same would be complied with, within a period of three weeks.
Consequently, in view of the fair stand taken by learned Additional Advocate General, this Court sees no reason to keep the present petition alive and same is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to do the needful in terms of order in question, within three weeks, failing which petitioner would be at liberty to get the present petition revived, so that appropriate steps towards execution of the order in question are taken. Petition stands disposed of in above terms.
