IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA: CWP.No.543/2002. Date of Decision :24.4.2007. Roshan Lal …Petitioner. Versus: R.M.P.N.B.and another. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr.B.S.Ranjan, Advocate. For Respondents. Mr.Ajay Kumar, Advocate. Sanjay Karol, J (Oral). The petitioner was employed in the Indian Army on 24.7.1961. On 10th November, 1983, he was appointed as Guard Currency with the respondent Bank and posted at Branch Office at Nagrota Bagawa, District Kangra., H.P. He was subsequently transferred to the Branch Office, The Mall, Shimla. The claim in the present petition is two fold: (i) that the petitioner’s pay be fixed at Rs.440.54 instead of Rs.245/- in terms of circular dated 21st August, 1986 issued by the respondents and (ii) since the petitioner has worked as Clerk- cum-Cashier on the extension counter in the Branch Office, 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Lakkar Bazar, Shimla, he be promoted from Guard Currency to Clerk-cum-Cashier and also be paid salary on the basis of equal work equal pay. In response, the respondents have filed an affidavit wherein it has been clearly mentioned that the present writ petition is barred under the principles of resjudicata as CWP.No.673/96 arising out of the same cause of action and for the same relief filed by the petitioner already stands dismissed by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 14th October, 1996. This position is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Since CWP.No.673 of 1996 titled Roshan Lal Vs. Union of India already stands dismissed, the present writ petition is also dismissed as the issues agitated in the present writ petition already stands raised and considered in the earlier writ petition. There shall be no order as to costs. (Sanjay karol), Judge. April 24, 2007(R)