IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Civil Writ Petition (T) No. 9074 of 2008 Date of decision: 27.4.2011. O.P.Vatts …..Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. & Anr. …. Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner : Mr. Suneet Goel, Advocate. For the Respondents : Ms. Ruma Kaushik Addl. A.G. with Mr. J.S.Rana, Assistant Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, Judge (oral). 1. The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the present case is covered by judgment dated 14.6.2010 in CWP(T) No. 7476 of 2008. It has also been stated that in CWP(T) No. 7476 of 2008 prayer was made on the similar lines as has been made in the present petition. This has not been denied by the learned Additional Advocate General. She has also stated that the present case is covered by judgment dated 14.6.2010 in CWP(T) No. 7476 of 2008. In these circumstances, it is not necessary to give facts in detail of the present case as well as stand taken by the respondents in the reply. The judgment dated 14.6.2010 in CWP(T) No. 7476 of 2008 is as follows:- “The case of the petitioner, in a nut-shell, is that he was not considered for promotion to the post of Principal Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? yes …2… from the post of Lecturer. Mr. R.K.Sharma, learned Senior Additional Advocate General submits that since the petitioner has not qualified the departmental examination in view of the instructions dated 20.08.2001, therefore, he could not be considered for promotion to the post of Principal. 2. Mr. Suneet Goel, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has qualified the departmental examination in April, 202. In these circumstances, the interest of justice will be met if the respondents are directed to now consider the case of petitioner for promotion to the post of Principal. 3. Consequently, the petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Principal within a period of four weeks from today and in case he is found suitable, he will be entitled to all consequential benefits. No costs.” 2. In view of the stand taken on either side, the present petition is also disposed of in terms of above judgment dated 14.6.2010. There shall be a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Principal in two months from the date of supply of copy of this judgment by the petitioner to the competent authority. In case the petitioner is found suitable for the post of Principal, then he will be entitled to all consequential benefits. April 27, 2011. ( Kuldip Singh ), (GR) Judge.