IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C. Rev.(T) No.: 12 of 2008. Decided on: 29.10.2010. _____________________________________________________ Himachal Road Transport Corporation. … Review Petitioner. Versus Raghubir Singh. … Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Review Petitioner : Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. K.C. Sankhyan, Advocate vice Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, Advocate. Rajiv Sharma, J. (Oral): The judgment dated 31st March, 1993 has been passed by the learned Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in presence of the learned counsel representing the respondent- Corporation. Learned counsel for the review petitioner has failed to point out any error apparent on the face of record. Consequently, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed, so also the pending application(s), if any. However, it is clarified that the petitioner Shri Raghubir Singh is entitled only to C.P.F. and not the 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - G.P.F. So far as rest of the directions are concerned, they need not be interfered with. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. October 29, 2010. (sck).