Disposed

Kuldeep Singh v. State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC21 Sept 2026EX.P./2114/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners sought execution of an earlier High Court order directing the respondents or competent authority to consider and decide their representations within twelve weeks. The respondents informed the Court that compliance might already have occurred and undertook to complete the required action within two weeks. The execution petition was disposed of with that direction, subject to revival and appropriate action if compliance did not occur, with listing for compliance on 16.10.2026.

What did the court decide?

Respondents were directed to comply with the earlier judgment within two weeks; on failure, the petitioners were permitted to revive the execution petition for appropriate action. Compliance was listed for 16.10.2026.

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of Hp and Others — Execution and Attachment | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

Execution Petition No.2114 of 2026 Date of Decision: 21.9.2026

¶3

_____________________________________________________________________ Kuldeep Singh and Anr. ……...Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.

¶4

……...Petitioners Versus …....Respondents

¶5

Coram

¶6

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

¶7

For the Petitioner: Mr. Yogesh Kumar Chandel Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

¶8

By way of present execution petition, prayer has been made by the petitioners for implementation and execution of order/judgment dated 1.4.2026, passed by this Court in CWP No.3857 of 2026, titled Kuldeep Singh and Anr. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., whereby afore petition came to be disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide representations of the petitioners within twelve weeks. Since no action, whatsoever, came to be taken at the behest of the respondents pursuant to aforesaid direction, petitioners have approached this Court in the instant proceedings.

¶9

¶10

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 two weeks from today.

¶11

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 two weeks, failing which petitioners would be at liberty to get the present petition revived so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken towards implementation of the

¶12

order/judgment.

¶13

List for compliance on 16.10.2026.

¶14

September 21, 2026

¶15

(manjit)

¶16

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge

Kuldeep Singh v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep Singh v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases