IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 6271 of 2010 Date of decision: 14.03.2011 Daya Devi …. Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …. Respondents Coram : The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner: Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Vinod Thakur, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. J.S. Guleria, Assistant Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 to 3. V.K. Ahuja , J. (Oral): The petitioner filed the present writ petition and claimed for the following reliefs:- (A) That the impugned action of the Respondents in not releasing the grants-in-aid and terminating the services may kindly be quashed and set aside and the Respondents may be further directed to reinstate the petitioner. (B) That the Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ of direction may kindly be issued directing the respondents to release the grants-in-aid from the due date till date as admissible under rules alongwith interest @ 9% and also to reinstate the petitioner. 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 © That the Respondents may be further directed to continue the grants-in-aid in future also.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to file a representation to respondent No. 2. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioner files an appropriate representation before respondent No. 2 alongwith documents, if any, within two weeks from today and in case, the post is still vacant at Govt. Senior Secondary School Kot Snore, District Mandi, respondent No. 2 shall consider the said representation by passing an appropriate order for appointment of the petitioner. Insofar as the relief of grant-in-aid is concerned, after considering the case of the similarly situated persons, which shall be brought to the notice of respondent No. 2 by the petitioner, the same shall be released for the payment of the salary of the petitioner by respondent No. 2. The order as above, shall be passed by respondent No. 2 within one month of the receipt of the representation alongwith a copy of the writ petition and a copy of the order 3. In view of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. ( V.K. Ahuja ), March 14, 2011 Judge (BSS) 3