IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 639 of 2011 Date of Decision : May 24, 2011 Kamal Nain … Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and ors. … Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioner: Mr. Naresh Kaul, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, A.G. with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. A.G. and Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy.A.G. for respondents-State. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) Amended memo of parties taken on record. 2. The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:- “(i) That the order dated 17.3.2008 deducting/ effecting recovery of one day salary for the period 17.1.2008 from the salary of March 2008 is in violation of principles of natural justice and law may very kindly be set aside with further directions to the respondents to regularize the period of absence of the present petitioner due to ailment from 15.1.2008 to 17.1.2008 (ii) That the respondents may very kindly be directed to release the salary for the period from 15.1.2008 to 17.1.2008 for which the earned leave application has been submitted as per Rule 40 of the CCS (Leave) Rules. 2 (iii) That necessary action against the erring official particularly against respondent No. 3 may kindly be directed to be taken to compensate the present petitioner by way of damages/costs in resorting to imposing dual penalties in violation of law as the actions of the Respondent No. 3 had led to harassment victimization to the present petitioner.” 3. Since the second respondent has to take appropriate action in accordance with law on Annexure P-8, appeal, it is not necessary for us at this stage to go into the merits of the case. Therefore this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to decide Annexure P-8 adverting to the submissions made therein including procedural irregularities and take proper action in accordance with law and justice within a period of four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition by the petitioner before the second respondent. The petitioner shall also be afforded opportunity of personal hearing in the process. 4. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Sanjay Karol), Judge. May 24, 2011 (PK/Jai)