IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA .

Ex. Pet. No. 885/2025 Decided on: 18.03.2026 Bimla Chauhan …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ....Respondents .………………………………………………………………………………

Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Vikas Rajput, Advocate.

For the respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.

Following order was passed in the matter on

03.03.2026: -

“Learned Additional Advocate General has shown an acknowledgment receipt of learned counsel for the petitioner towards payment of costs of Rs.1500/- to him in terms of order dated 12.12.2025.

Respondents, however, have still not filed the compliance affidavit. This is despite the fact that under order dated 12.12.2025, final opportunity was granted to comply with the judgment subject to costs of Rs.1500/- and thereafter, another opportunity was granted to the respondents on 06.01.2026 with the rider of no further opportunity for filing the compliance affidavit.

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

Learned Additional Advocate General seeks a week’s more time for filing the compliance affidavit. Prayer is acc.epted, however, at costs of Rs.5000/- to be paid to the pePtitioner on the next date of hearing. It is made clear that in case compliance affidavit is not filed, the respondents shall remain present in the Court on the next date.

List on 18.03.2026.”

2. Pursuant to above, learned Additional Advocate General submits that the cost, as imposed in the previous order, has been paid to the petitioner. This position is admitted by learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. Learned Additional Advocate General has also placed on record a copy of office instructions dated 17.03.2026 from the office of the Secretary (Education) to the Government of H.P. con veying that “I am directed to refer to your letter No. EDNHE(15)B(1)2024-Misc dated 16.03.2026 on the subject cited above and to convey the approval to release the benefit of adhoc period to the petitioner in the UGC pay scale w.e.f. 03.04.1987 instead of 01.04.1995 subject to the completion of all codal formalities and any legal remedy State may exercise if deems fit.”

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the decision now taken by the respondents, as extracted above, though redresses the grievance of the petitioner and is in compliance with the judgment in question, however, the respondents be directed to complete the codal formalities by issuing appropriate orders, etc., within a time-bound schedule.

Taking note of the above, the respondents are directed to do the needful by issuing necessary and consequential orders/ complete the codal formalities in terms of the decision conveyed in the office instructions dated 17.03.2026, within three weeks from today.

The execution petition stands disposed of in the above terms. Liberty, however, is reserved to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy, in accordance with law, for redressal of her surviving grievance(s), if any, at an appropriate stage, if the need so arises. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

18^th March, 2026 (rohit)