1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 4811 of 2009 Decided on: 16.6.2011 Sapna Sharma ……….Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others ……….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner. : Mr. Rajnish Maniktala, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anil Jaswal, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General for respondents No. 1 & 2. None for respondent No. 3. Mr. K.D. Sood, Advocate, for respondent No. 4. Rajiv Sharma, J. (Oral) Mr. Rajnish Maniktala, learned Counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP No. 1097 of 2004, titled as Rajinder Sharma versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others and CWP No. 1103 of 2004, titled Naresh Kumar versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on 20th June, 2008. It has also been brought to the notice of the Court that L.P.As preferred against the judgment rendered in CWP No. 1097 of 2004 and CWP No. 1103 of 2004, dated 20th June, 2008 have been decided. In other words, the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP No. 1097 of 2004, titled as Rajinder Sharma versus State of Himachal Pradesh and 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?. No 2 others and CWP No. 1103 of 2004, titled Naresh Kumar versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on 20th June, 2008, has attained finality. According to Mr. Rajnish Maniktala, learned Counsel for the petitioner, the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment cited herein above. I have gone through the judgment cited herein above and is of the considered view that the present lis is squarely covered by the principles settled therein. 2. Consequently, the present petition is allowed in view of the principles laid down in the judgment cited herein above. The respondent-State is directed to release senior scale to the petitioner with effect from 1st July, 1996 and selection grade with effect from 1st July, 2001. The respondents are further directed to fix the pay of the petitioner at Rs. 14940/- with effect from 1st July, 2006. However, as far as the challenge to Grant-in-Aid Rules, 2008 is concerned, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to challenge the same in appropriate proceedings, as advised. The pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma Judge June 16, 2011. (hl)