IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 3808/2008 Reserved on: 1.12.2010 Decided on:27.12.2010 _____________________________________________ Er. C.M. Madhaik. …Petitioner. Versus H.P. State Electricity Board and others. …Respondents. ________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. S.R. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mrs. Anjula Khajuria, Advocate for respondent No.1. None for other respodnents. _____________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). The present petition has been filed with the following reliefs: (i) The impugned Annexures A-6 to A-9 and A-9/a to A-9/5 may kindly be quashed and set aside; (ii) Directions may kindly be issued to the respondent- Board to hold the meeting of Review D.P.C. meeting afresh and consider the applicant for promotion in 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 accordance with the procedure known as Procedure for selection post quoted above keeping in view the latest law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the Government instructions Annexure A/11 and after his promotion the applicant may be allowed all consequential benefits i.e. seniority and arrears of pay etc.” 2. However, it is not in dispute that the present lis is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP-T No. 2628/2008, tilted as H.P. Samanaya Varg Karamchari Kalayan Mahasang versus State of H.P. and others, decided on 18.9.2009. It is also not in dispute that the Special Leave Petition preferred against this judgment has also been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 3. In view of above cited judgment in H.P. Samanaya Varg Karamchari Kalayan Mahasang versus State of H.P. and others, (supra), the present petition is disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge 27.12. 2010 *awasthi*