IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 2744 of 2008. Decided on: 27.03.2009. Govind Ram. … … … Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and Others. … … … Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner: Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, Advocate vice counsel. For the Respondents: Mr. R. K. Sharma, Senior Additional Advocate General with Mr. Vikas Rathore, Deputy Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): The case of the petitioner in brief is that his seniority has been fixed wrongly vis-à-vis one Shri Tule Ram. He made several representations for assigning him the correct seniority. In sequel to the representations made by the petitioner, the case of the petitioner was taken up by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests with the Conservator of Forest, Kullu vide Annexure P-G/1 dated 11th August, 1994. The Conservator of Forests, Kullu sent a detailed reply to the Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - Principal Chief Conservator of Forests vide Annexure P-H/1. It appears that the grievance of the petitioner was not redressed. He approached the learned H.P. State Administrative Tribunal by way of O.A. No.455 of 1995. The original application was ordered to be treated as representation and it was directed to be decided by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests vide order dated 30th March, 1995. The representation made by the petitioner was rejected by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests on 26th July, 1995. A bare perusal of Annexure P-J dated 26th July, 1995 reveals that communication Annexure P-F/1 was not taken into consideration. It was necessary for the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests to take decision as per detailed report given by the Conservator of Forests, Kullu vide Annexure P-F/1. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Annexure P-J, dated 25th July, 1995 is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner afresh strictly as per Annexure P-F/1 within a period of eight weeks from today. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. March 27, 2003. (Rajiv Sharma) (sck). Judge.