IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 13622 of 2008. Date of Decision: 30.12.2010. Raj Pal Thakur …Petitioner. Versus. State of HP & Anr. … Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. Whether approved for Reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Dy. AG. Deepak Gupta, J.(oral) 1. By means of this petition, the petitioner seeks benefit of the communication dated 5.2.2000 issued by the State Government and prays that since his job in a privately managed school has been affected by the up-gradation of the Government Schools, he should be given appointment on contractual basis. Condition No.3 of Annexure A-5 reads as follows:- “3. This decision is only applicable to the schools managed by the privately managements which are indicated in the above referred communications.” 2. This condition clearly indicates that the same is only applicable to the schools mentioned in the communication referred to in the letter. The Secretary Education has found that the name of the school of the petitioner does not find mention in the letters referred to in paragraph 3. It is evident that the benefit of communication dated 5.2.2000 was only limited to employees of those privately managed schools which were mentioned in the letters dated 1.12.1999, 2.12.1999, 20.12.1999, 28.12.1999 and 12.1.2000. Since the school of the petitioner does not fall within the ambit of these communications, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief. The petition is, therefore, rejected. No order as to costs. 30th December, 2010 ( Deepak Gupta ) (Krn Guleria) Judge.