Himachal Pradesh High Court
EX.P./1815/2026 of VIKAS Vs Himachal Road Transport Corporation Shimla- 171001 on 3 September 2026
COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No.1815 of 2026 Date of Decision: 3.9.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Vikas ……...Petitioner Versus Himachal Road Transport Corporation and Anr. …....Respondents Coram
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Execution Petition No.1815 of 2026
Date of Decision: 3.9.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Vikas ……...Petitioner Versus Himachal Road Transport Corporation and Anr.
…....Respondents
Coram
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sat Prakash, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, Advocate. ___________________________________________________________________________
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 26.11.2025, passed by this Court in CWP No. 18263 of 2025, titled Vikas v Himachal Road Transport Corporation and Anr., whereby afore petition came to be disposed of with a direction to respondent/competent authority to consider and decide representation of the petitioner within a period of four weeks. Since no action, whatsoever, came to be taken at the behest of the respondents pursuant to aforesaid direction, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings.
2
2. Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, Advocate, appearing for the respondents, states that though she has every reason to presume and believe that by now, order/judgment sought to be executed, 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 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 towards implementation of the order/judgment.
September 3, 2026
(Sandeep Sharma), (manjit)
Judge