IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 5675 of 2008 Decided on: 6.12.2010 Shankar Dass & Ors. ..…Petitioners Versus H.P.S.E.B. …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1No For the petitioners : Mr. Subhash Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Shashi Shirshoo, Advocate, vice Ms. Anjula Khajuria, Advocate. Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral) The petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:- “(i) That this O.A. may kindly be allowed with costs. (ii) That the respondent-Board may kindly be directed to prepare the seniority list of the applicants in the Civil Maintenance Division. (iii) That the respondent-board may kindly be further directed to treat the applicants on the similar lines as it is doing vis-à-vis the Helpers of the other two divisions and the Fitters of the Civil Maintenance Division. In this context, it would be worthwhile to direct the respondent-board to take into 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? consideration of the regular services being rendered by the applicants from 23.1.1990. (iv) That the respondent-board may kindly be further restrained from going to conclude its D.P.C. until and unless the names of the applicants are duly considered by according them respective and relevant seniority positions. (v) Such other or further relief to which the applicants may be found entitled, may also be granted.” 2. It is not in dispute that petitioners were transferred from Bhawa Construction Circle to the Generation Wing, Bhawa Nagar. The petitioners are claiming their seniority in the Generation Wing. 3. Now, the respondents in their reply have clarified that the petitioners were working as helpers under the Bhawa Construction Division. The administrative control of the Superintending Engineer, Bhawa Construction Circle, HPSEB on 1.1.1991 was re-named as Civil Maintenance Construction, Bhawa Nagar and its control along with its Sub division as well as sanctioned posts was placed under the administrative control of the Superintending Engineer, Generation Circle, HPSEB, Bhawa Nagar. Names of the petitioners and other similarly situated persons were detached from the Superintending Engineer Bhawa Construction Circle and placed under the Generation Circle. My attention has been invited to the Circulars dated 29.9.1991, Annexure A-3 and 6.8.1991, Annexure R-II, which evidently clarifies that posts in question is dying cadre. Consequently, the arrangement worked out by the respondents cannot be said to be illegal. 4. No legally enforceable rights of the petitioners stand violated. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. (Sanjay Karol),Judge. December 6, 2010, (vs)