IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 8180 of 2008. Decided on: 27.12.2010. __________________________________________________________ Krishan Lal. … Petitioner. Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh and others. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Mr. Vijender Katoch, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, J. (oral): The present petition has been filed for re-fixation of seniority. The petitioner has not added the persons who are likely to be affected in case the petition is allowed. It is settled law that the persons who are likely to be affected are necessary party. In view of this, Mr. Vijender Katoch, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is permitted to withdraw the present petition to enable his client to file fresh petition on the same or similar cause of action and also to array the persons as party-respondents who are likely to be affected, in case the petition is allowed. It is made clear that since the petitioner had been 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - pursuing his remedy before this Court diligently, the question of delay and laches will not come in his way. 2. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed having been withdrawn, so also the pending application(s), if any. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. December 27, 2010. (sck).