IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 1440 of 2011 Decided on: April 11, 2011. Partap Thakur. Vrs. State of H.P. & ors. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioner: Rupinder Singh For the Respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, AG with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. AG. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The Writ Petition is filed mainly with the following prayer: “ (i) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may also kindly be issued directing the contents of this sub-para are admitted to the extent that the name of the applicant was considered in the DPC convened in the month of September, 2000 but the recommendation of the DPC was kept in sealed cover since, departmental enquiry was pending against him. After the enquiry was concluded his name was considered in the next DPC convened in the month of June, 2005 and on the recommendation of the DPC he was promoted to the post of Supdt. Grade-II. It is denied that the applicant was to be considered for promotion w.e.f. 21.09.2000 i.e. after the enquiry was completed. As already submitted in the preliminary submissions, the penalty of ‘censure’ was awarded to the applicant. When the sealed cover was opened it was decided by the DPC that since, the applicant has not been dully exonerated as such his name should be considered in the next DPC. Accordingly, the name was considered in the meeting of DPC held in June, 2005. As such the applicant has no claim at Sr. No. 43 of the tentative seniority list of Supdt. Grade-II as claimed by him. It is pertinent to mention here that the seniority list circulated vide letter dated 17.05.2006 against which the applicant represented to the replying respondent on 25.06.2006 is under consideration as several objections have been received which are being considered/examined.” 2. In view of the stand taken in the reply and in view of such intervening developments, in case the petitioner has still any grievance left, it will be open to him to approach the first respondent, in which case, grievance shall be looked into and appropriate action in accordance with law and justice shall be taken within another one month. 2 3. The Writ Petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. April 11, 2011. ( Justice Sanjay Karol ), (karan) Judge.