IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA C.W.P. No. 5400 of 2010. Decided on 23rd November, 2010. Narinder Kumar. ….Petitioner. Versus State of HP & others …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. For the Petitioner: Mr. A.K. Rattan, Advocate. For Respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. AG, for respondents No.1 to 3. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioner approached this Court when he was sought to be replaced by a regular/contract teacher. On 31st August, 2010, this Court passed the interim order, which reads as follows: “There will be a direction to the second respondent to file an affidavit, as to why the 4th respondent cannot be accommodated in one of the vacancies, as pointed out in Annexure P-6.” 3. The writ petition is disposed of making it clear that in case the petitioner points out any other vacancy also except the vacancy at Government College, Dharamshala as pointed out in Annexure P-6, the second respondent will make an attempt to see whether private respondent can be accommodated in that College so that the petitioner can be continued in the present College. However, 2 we make it clear that this is not to be taken that the petitioner has a lien to continue in the post and PTA appointment is only an ad hoc arrangement and that PTA appointment is not to be for an indefinite period since in any case, when regular hands are to be accommodated, PTA appointed teachers will have to give way. We make it clear that so long as the petitioner is continuing as PTA teacher, the due and admissible salary will be paid. In case the regularly appointed teacher is disturbed in terms of the orders in this writ petition, an opportunity of being heard to that teacher shall also be granted. 4. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. Copy Dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 23rd November, 2010. ( Justice V.K. Ahuja), (tr) Judge