IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 1018 of 2011. Decided on 26th April, 2011. Tarsem Lal. …Petitioner. Versus HRTC & another. …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the Petitioner : Ms. Anjali Soni Verma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayers: “(i) That writ in the nature of certiorari may kindly be issued by quashing the impugned Memorandum dated 2.2.1996, Annexure P-1 and office order dated 27.5.1996/30.7.1996, Annexure P-3, whereby the services of the petitioner has been dispensed with illegally. (ii) That writ in the nature of mandamus may very kindly be issued by directing the respondent Corporation to re-instate/re-engage the services of the petitioner as a Driver as similar situated persons have also been re-engaged/reinstated by the respondent Corporation.” 2. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents on instruction submits that Annexure P-8 is received only with the writ petition. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to look into Annexure P-8 and take appropriate action thereon within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition by the petitioner. 3. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 26th April, 2011 (Justice Sanjay Karol), (tr) Judge.