Surindra Kumari Vs State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Surindra Kumari Vs State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No.4 to ensure that the pension order authorizing pension in favour of the petitioner, in terms of communication dated 31.10.2025, is passed expeditiously, preferably within four weeks; failing which the petitioner may have the petition revived for appropriation action in accordance with law towards execution of the judgment sought to be executed.

Issue for consideration

Whether anything remained to be done at the behest of the respondents-State towards execution of the judgment, given that the petitioner's pension case had been processed and forwarded to the office of the Accountant General for authorization of pension. +1 more

Court's answer

Since the respondents-State processed the petitioner's pension case and forwarded it to the Accountant General, and orders regarding authorization of pension now fall to be passed by the office of the Accountant General, nothing remains to be done at the behest of the respondents-State.

Ratio / Principle

The present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4 to ensure that the pension order authorizing pension in favour of the petitioner, in terms of the communication dated 31.10.2025 sent by the Executive Engineer, Jal Shakti Division No. 1, Una, is passed expeditiously, preferably within four weeks.

Key takeaways

If the pension order is not passed within four weeks, the petitioner would be at liberty to have the present petition revived so that appropriation action in accordance with law is taken towards execution of the judgment sought to be executed.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Execution Petition No. 148 of 2025, High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla (Sandeep Sharma, J., oral), decided 6.11.2025 — Surindra Kumari v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. Execution of a judgment mandating authorization of pension for a petitioner who retired from government service on 28.2.2002. Placed on record were a communication dated 4.11.2025 of the Superintending Engineer, Jal Shakti Circle, Una, enclosing a communication dated 31.10.2025 addressed to the office of the Accountant General recording that the petitioner's pension case stood processed, along with the statement that duly filled pension papers had been forwarded to the Accountant General for authorizing pension. Holding that nothing remains to be done at the behest of the respondents-State, the Court disposed of the petition while directing respondent No.4 to ensure that the pension order authorizing pension, in terms of the communication dated 31.10.2025 sent by the Executive Engineer, Jal Shakti Division No. 1, Una, is passed expeditiously, preferably within four weeks, failing which the petitioner may have the petition revived so that appropriation action in accordance with law is taken towards execution of the judgment.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Execution Petition No. 148 of 2025 Date of Decision: 6.11.2025

Surindra Kumari

……...Petitioners

Versus …....Respondents

State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.

Coram

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?

For the Petitioners: Mr. Bonit Thakur, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.4.

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

While placing on record communication dated 4.11.2025, issued under the signature of Superintending Engineer, Jal Shakti Circle, Una, enclosing therewith copy of communication dated 31.10.2025 addressed to office of Accountant General, whereby case of the petitioner has been processed, learned Additional Advocate General states that in terms of mandate contained in the judgment sought to be executed, pension papers duly filled in, in favour of the petitioner, who has retired

2

from government service on 28.2.2002, have been further forwarded to the office of Accountant General for authorizing pension.

Having perused aforesaid documents, which are taken on record, there appears to be merit in the contention of learned Additional Advocate General. Since respondents after having processed the case of the petitioner forwarded the case of the petitioner to the Accountant General and now orders with regard to authorization of pension are to be passed by the office of the Accountant General, nothing remains to be done at the behest of the respondents-State.

Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.4 to ensure that pension order thereby authorizing pension in favour of the petitioner in terms of communication dated 31.10.2025 sent by the Executive Engineer, Jal Shakti Division No. 1, Una, is passed expeditiously, preferably, within four weeks, failing which petitioner would be at liberty to get the present petition revived so that appropriation action in accordance with law is taken towards execution of the judgment sought to be executed.

November 6, 2025

(manjit)