IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 814 of 2008. Decided on: June 29, 2010. Ramesh Kaundal. ….. Petitioner. Versus H.P.P.S.C & anr. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. For the petitioner (s) Petitioner in person with Mr. Dalip Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents M/S. D.K.Khanna & Ranjana Parmar, Advocates. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The Writ Petition is filed with the following prayers: “(i) the Order of State Information Commission Annexure P-1 and that of Public Information Officer Annexure A/4 attached to Annexure P-H/1 rejecting the request for supplying copies of ACRs, may kindly be quashed and set aside in the interest of justice. (ii) the writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ directing respondent to supply full photo copies of the ACRs of the petitioner for the year 2004-05 and 2005-06 may kindly be issued.” 2. Learned counsel for the Commission submits that the adverse remarks against the petitioner had already been expunged and those remarks have not stood in the way of the promotions of the petitioner. It is also submitted that the petitioner had been duly considered by the DPC at the relevant time and in view of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him, the proceedings had been 2 kept in a sealed cover. By a separate judgment in CWP(T) No. 12182 of 2008, we have set aside the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner. Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to process the case of the petitioner, now that the disciplinary proceedings have been set aside and take appropriate action in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of production of the copy of this judgment. The action taken in the matter of promotion shall be intimated to the petitioner within another two weeks and in case, the petitioner is still aggrieved, it will be open to him to pursue the same in appropriate proceedings. 3. As far as the prayers are concerned, there will be a direction to the State Public Information Officer, under the Commission to consider the application(s) afresh in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in (2008) 8 SCC 725, Dev Dutt versus Union of India & others, within a period of one month from the date of production of the copy of this judgment, by the petitioner. In case, the petitioner has any other surviving grievance, it will be open to him to represent before the Secretary, H.P. Public Service Commission, within one month from today, in which case, appropriate action in accordance with law in the matter shall be taken within another two months. 4. With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy Dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. June 29, 2010. ( Justice Kuldip Singh ), (karan) Judge.