IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 5299 of 2008. Decided on: 17th May, 2010. Santosh Kumar Verma & ors. …Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. & ors. …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. For the petitioners : Ms. Archana Dutt, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. Advocate General, for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. R.S. Gautam, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioners have filed the Original Application before the Tribunal with the following prayers: “(i) That the respondents be directed to promote the applicants as Mass Education and Information Officer from the date their junior respondent No.3 has been promoted as such. (ii) That the respondents be directed to grant the arrears/difference of pay to the applicant with effect from the date their junior was promoted till the date of their actual promotion. (iii) That the respondents be directed to give the applicants their rightful seniority at the appropriate places in relation their junior who has been promoted.” 2 2. It is seen from Annexure R-3/B, order dated 14.2.1997 that the seniority of the private respondent has been restored. According to the petitioners, the same has been done behind their back. Be that as it may. According to the petitioners, they have been since promoted as Mass Education and Information Officers and their surviving grievance is only with respect to the monetary benefits. Whether the petitioners are entitled to the monetary benefits would depend on several factors as to whether there was any illegal denial of promotion, as to whether the petitioners had vigilantly pursued their grievances, whether there was a change of the work in the promoted category etc. Those aspects need a deeper examination by the competent authority. Therefore, we dispose of this writ petition without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, however, granting liberty to the petitioners to make appropriate representation(s) before the first respondent. In the event of the petitioners making such representation(s) before the first respondent within one month from today, the matter will be duly considered by the respondent with notice to the petitioner and the third respondent and appropriate orders shall be passed in the matter in accordance with law within another two months. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 17th May, 2010 ( Justice Surjit Singh), (tr) Judge. 3