IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 5601 of 2008. Date of decision: 20.10.2010. Ahilya Devi and others ….. Petitioners Vs. Managing Director, H.P.State Civil Supplies Corporation and others. …. Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. For the Petitioners : Mr. G.R.Palsra, Advocate. For the Respondents : Ms. Bhawna Dutta, Advocate for respondents No.1 & 2. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petition is filed with the following prayers: (i) The applicant be considered and promoted as an Senior Accountant by keeping his seniority intact above the respondent No.3 and the seniority list be re-drawn, accordingly. (ii) The applicant be awarded all the benefits due to him by virtue of his service as an Accountant and after promotion to the post of Senior Accountant. 2. In the reply it is stated as follows: “However, it is submitted that the Seniority list of Senior Assistants (Accounts) stand already finalised vide office Memo. No. Admn.8-5/80-25189-218 dated the 8th - 2 - November, 1993 (copy enclosed as Annexure R-I) alongwith English version R-1/A. The contents of present application relate to promotion order which should have been annexed as particulars of the order against which application is made. The tentative seniority list (Annexure PA) filed by the applicant has no nexus as the applicant is challenging the promotion order in the present application. (iv) This para of the application is not admitted to be correct, as the applicant has mis-represented the facts in this para. In fact the promotion of respondent No.3 has been made on purely ad-hoc basis on the basis of running Roster. The claim of the applicant against the backlog of Scheduled Tribes Quota will be considered in accordance with the latest instructions issued by the Secretary (Per) to the Govt. of Himachal Pradesh, vide letter No. Per(AP)C-B(12)-1/98, dated 20th August, 1998, which is effective from 12th December, 1997, at the time of regular promotion.” 3. In view of the stand taken in the reply, in case the newly added petitioners have any grievance, it will be open to them to pursue the same before the 1st respondent. 4. With the above observation, the petition stands disposed of so also the pending applications, if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. October 20, 2010. (Justice Kuldip Singh), (Hem) Judge.