IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP (T) No. 16610 of 2008 Decided on : 7.12.2010. Om Parkash Chadha …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & another ..Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No For the Petitioner : Mr. Dushyant Dadwal, Advocate. For the Respondents : Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Addl. A.G. Kuldip Singh, Judge (Oral) The petitioner has prayed for quashing of office order dated 10.10.2002 Annexure A-1. The grievance of the petitioner is that in CWP No. 178 of 1998 the petitioner was not a party but respondent No.2 in compliance to the judgment dated 23.5.2000 has passed the impugned office order and reverted the petitioner from the post of Head Draughtsman to Draughtsman. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is one of the appellants in S.L.P. No. 14969 of 2000. In office order dated 10.10.2002, it has been specifically stated that the reversions are subject to final decision of S.L.P. No. 14969 of 2000 (18082 of 2001) filed by Jagdish Kumar and others. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment ? yes 2 2. In the reply filed by respondents No.1 & 2, it has been stated that the subject matter of the present application is subjudice before the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 2708 of 2002. Since the matter is pending before the Supreme Court against judgment dated 23.5.2000 in CWP No. 178 of 1998 and the office order dated 10.10.2002 itself is under challenge before the Supreme Court, therefore, no order can be passed in this writ petition which is accordingly dismissed and the rights of the parties will be governed by the ultimate decision of the Supreme Court. The petition stands disposed of. ( Kuldip Singh ), December 7, 2010 Judge. (GR)