IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP (T) No. 8608 of 2008 Decided on : 07.12.2010. Nek Ram ..…Petitioner. Versus Himachal Pradesh State Forest Corporation Ltd and others. .… Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Ms. Vidushi Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Shashi Shirshoo, Advocate. V.K. Sharma, Judge (Oral) The petition has been filed on the following prayers vide para 7 (ii) to (iv) :- “(i) That the combined seniority list Annexure A-2 issued on 22.12.2000 and then latest revised final seniority list which has not yet been circulated to the applicant issued on 19.2.2002 ought to be cancelled and fresh list prepared instead. (ii) That the applicant be regularized w.e.f 1984 or the earlier date from which the persons junior to him have been regularized. (iii) That the applicant be given consequential benefits with interest @ 18 % per annum.” 2. In the reply, filed on behalf of respondents, the following stand has been taken vide para 6 (vi) :- 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No, 2 “ That the contents of this para are admitted to the extent that seniority list used to be maintained zone-wise. Further it is specifically denied that the seniority lists were not communicated to the concerned employees properly. As per decision dated 3.3.2000 of Board of Directors of respondent Corporation joint seniority list A-2 of Resin/Timber Watchers serving in all the three Zones of respondent Corporation was prepared as per rules. This seniority was prepared keeping in view date of appointment/regularization as Resin/Timber Watcher. Where the regular appointment of two or mote Timber/Resin Watchers is the same, the seniority in the feeder category of Timber/Resin Watcher (daily wage) has been kept in view. Where even date of appointment on daily wages is the same, the seniority has been determined on the basis of date of birth showing the elder senior to the younger. As already submitted tentative seniority list was finanlized after inviting objections from all the concerned employees, including the applicant, and was issued which is annexure R- I. In the revised seniority list, applicant’s name figure at Sr. No. 192. It is wrong and denied that no proper instructions or procedure has been followed in preparing said list. It is also wrong and denied that entire career of the applicant been jeopardized. The juniors, as alleged by the applicant, has rightly been regularized w.e.f. 1986 as per their seniority maintained in the Zone in which they were serving at that relevant time.” 3. In view of the above, in case the petitioner still has any surviving grievance with regard to the factual and legal position, he may certainly point out the same by way of appropriate representation before the first respondent/competent authority 3 within a period of one month from today along with copy of this judgment and the said respondent/competent authority shall decide the same within another three months after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, if so desired. 4. In view of the above, the petition stands disposed of, so also the pending CMP(s), if any. (V.K. Sharma) Judge. 7th December, 2010 CS