IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 876 of 2006 Date of decision: 10th November, 2006 Suresh Chand Petitioner Versus Union of India Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr.Justice V K Gupta, C J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Shewta Julka, Advocate, vice Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr Sandeep Sharma, Asstt. Solicitor General of India. V K Gupta, C J (Oral) The petitioner on his own admission retired on superannuation in the year 2003. More than three years later he is claiming his promotion by alleging that at the stage of considering him for promotion his ACRs were not taken into account. First and foremost, we are disinclined to entertain 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? this petition on the ground of grave, unexplained latches also in view of the fact that the petitioner stood retired more than three years back. Secondly, the communication dated 14.3.2001 actually suggests that the ACRs might have been taken into consideration. The petition is dismissed in limine. (V K Gupta), C J. November 10, 2006 (Deepak Gupta), J. (D)