IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 10922 of 2008. Decided on: 22.12.2010. __________________________________________________________ Parmod Kumar. … Petitioner. Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh and others. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Mr. K.B. Khajuria, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. J.S. Guleria, Assistant Advocate General for respondents No.1 to 5. Respondent No.6 ex-parrte. Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.7. Rajiv Sharma, J. (oral): Petitioner has assailed the appointment of respondent No.7 to the post of Primary Assistant Teacher. The case of the petitioner, in a nutshell, is that respondent No.7 has never applied for the post in question. It has come in the reply that respondent No.7 could not be called for interview as her name was left out inadvertently. However, the call letter was received by her brother on 25.5.2004. Moreover, as per 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - result prepared by the Selection Committee, the petitioner is at Sr. No.3 in the merit. 2. Accordingly, in view of the observations made hereinabvoe, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed, so also the pending application(s), if any. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. December 22, 2010. (sck).