Himachal Pradesh High Court
EX.PT/47/2026 on 15 October 2026
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.
Ex. PT. No.47 of 2026
Decided on: 15th October, 2026
Bhup Singh and others
....Petitioners
versus
State of H.P. and others
...Respondents
Coram
Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioners: Mr. Shekhar Badola, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Balvinder Singh Ballu, Deputy Advocate General.
Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge (Oral)
Learned Deputy Advocate General has produced instructions dated 14.10.2026 issued by the Director of Higher Education, Himachal Pradesh along with order dated 24.09.2026 passed by the Secretary (Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, which are taken on record.
2. A perusal of the aforesaid instructions reveals that the Principal Division Bench of this Court in Execution Petition No.72 of 2024, titled, Nishant Sharma and others vs. State of H.P and another has passed the following directions:- “4. Keeping in view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that the consideration has been done, whether rightly or wrongly, and it would not be within the ambit of 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
the executing Court as such, since the order was only for consideration of the case.
5. Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to file a writ petition challenging the said order. Permission granted.”
3. This Court while allowing the writ petition preferred by the petitioners had only given directions to the respondents to re- consider the case of the petitioners for suitable revision in their pay scale, keeping in view the rise in price index, if such factor was applied as one of the parameters while granting revision of pay scales to other categories under 2012 Rules. The entire exercise was ordered to be completed within eight weeks.
4. After the directions given by this Court, respondent No.1, has now passed a detailed order on 24.09.2026. This Court while executing the order, cannot go behind the directions contained therein and once the order was only to consider the case of the petitioners for suitable revision, the mandate contained in the judgment sought to be executed, has been complied with and nothing remains to be adjudicated in the present execution petition and the same is closed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to avail an appropriate remedy, if they are aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 24.09.2026 passed by the Secretary (Education) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) 15th October, 2026
Judge (naveen)