IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 10413 of 2008. Decided on: 27.12.2010. __________________________________________________________ Inder Singh Verma. … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Ms. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, J. (oral): The petitioner was promoted on the basis of Annexure A-1, as Centre Head Teacher from the post of Head Teacher. Same has been withdrawn by the respondents vide Annexure A-6, date 10th March, 2001. Admittedly, the petitioner has not been heard before the decision was taken vide Annexure A-6. The petitioner on the basis of promotion order had started discharging the duties of higher post and was also drawing higher salary. His promotion and pay/salary could not be reduced without hearing the petitioner. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - 2. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Annexures A-5 and A- 6 are quashed and set aside. In normal circumstances the respondents ought to have been granted the apportioning to proceed with the matter in accordance with law. However, since the petitioner has since superannuated, it will cause immense economical hardship to the petitioner if the respondents are permitted to proceed with the matter in accordance with law. Accordingly, the proceedings are closed. The pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. December 27, 2010. (sck).