The Parties to the case are duty bound to follow the order and do the needful as granted by tribunal: High Court of Shimla
At the time when any order or judgement is passed by the tribunal it is a duty of each party to follow the direction ordered by then between the said time period if not already done, failing which, other party would be at liberty to get the present proceedings revived, so that appropriate action against that party could be taken in accordance with law. This Honorable judgement was passed by High Court of Himachal Pradesh Shimla in the case of Harbans Lal Versus State of H.P.& others [Execution Petition No.20 of 2021] by The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
By way of instant Execution Petition filed by petitioner under Rule 16 of the H.P. High Court Original Side Rules, prayer had been made on behalf of the petitioner for issuance of directions to the respondents to implement and execute the judgment/order dated 10.10.2018, passed by erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal, titled as Harbans Lal versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others. Careful perusal of aforesaid judgment, alleged to had been violated, (Annexure E-1), revealed that learned Tribunal below while disposing of the original application, directed the respondents to refund the deposited amount to the applicant/petitioner within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of the order by the applicant/petitioner. Since no action, if any, ever came to be taken at the behest of the respondents pursuant to the aforesaid direction issued by the Tribunal, applicant/ petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings.
The learned Deputy Advocate General while accepting notice on behalf of the respondents, states that, “though he has every reason to believe and presume that by now aforesaid judgment/ order alleged to have been violated, must have been complied with, but if not, same would be complied with within a period of two weeks from today.”
Consequently, in view of the fair statement made by learned Deputy Advocate General representing the respondents, this Court disposed of the case stating that, “it sees no reason to keep the present petition alive and as such, same is accordingly disposed of with the direction to the respondents to do the needful in terms of judgment/order dated 10.10.2018 passed by learned Tribunal below in OA (M) No. 529 of 2018, positively within a period of two weeks, if not already done, failing which, petitioner would be at liberty to get the present proceedings revived, so that appropriate action, in accordance with law, is taken towards implementation of the judgment/ order, sought to be executed in the instant proceedings.”