IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.O.P.C. No. 68 of 2010. Decided on: 27th September, 2010. O.P. Dogra. …Petitioner. -Versus- Dr. Shrikant Baldi, I.A.S., Principal Secretary (Education) and another. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. D.P. Gupta, Advocate vice Mr. K.D. Shreedhar, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): According to the petitioner, the calculations made by the respondents in paragraph No. 3 of the reply are not correct. However, it is averred in this paragraph that in case the petitioner is not satisfied, he can submit a representation about the calculation and the same shall be examined and decided in accordance with the rules. 2. Consequently, the petitioner is permitted to make a representation to the competent authority within a week from today and the same shall be decided by the competent authority within a further period of two weeks thereafter. The due and admissible interest shall be paid to the petitioner from the date of his retirement. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 3. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the petition stands disposed of. Copy dasti, on usual terms. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge September 27, 2010. (bhupender)