High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 09 SHI CK 4443

Pradeep Katna vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Anr.

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla · Decided on 24 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sandeep Sharma, J
CASE NUMBER
Execution Petition No.2225 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 259 words

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 6.1.2026, passed by this Court in CWP No.241 of 2026, titled Pradeep Katna v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., whereby afore petition came to be disposed of with a direction to respondents/competent authority to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of office order dated 23.8.2025 passed by the Director (School Education) and judgment passed in Ravinder Kumar within a period of six 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.

Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondents, states that though he 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 three weeks from today.

3.

Consequently, in view of the fair stand adopted by the learned Additional Advocate General, 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 three 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.