1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 9130 of 2008 . Date of decision: 22.3.2011 ________________________________________________________________ Kishori Lal ......Petitioner. Versus State of H. P. and others. ......Respondents Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, J. 1 Whether approved for reporting? No. ________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Ranjan Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General. Justice V.K. Sharma, J. (Oral). The petition has been filed on the following prayers vide para 7 (i) and (ii): “i) That the respondents may be directed to give the benefit of the approved military service for the purpose of seniority to the applicant as Forest Guard forthwith. ii) That after assigning the seniority, the Respondents may be directed to consider and promote the applicant to the higher post of Deputy Ranger w.e.f. 2.9.2011 (A-5) i.e. the date from when the junior i.e. the Respondent No.5 was promoted with all consequential benefits, like seniority and arrears of salary etc. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2 forthwith.” 2. In reply on behalf of the respondents the following stand has been taken vide paras 3 and 6(ix) and (x) :- “3. Particulars of the order against which this application is made: The applicant was appointed in Kullu Forest Division vide his letter No. 15/G dated 2.4.1992. As per Principal Chief Conservator of H.P. Shimla instructions issued vide his Memo. No.437-23/85(E.II) Vol.IV dated 21.1.1994, the applicant was temporarily transferred to Great Himalayan National Park Shamshi vide Conservator of Forest Kullu office order No. 9/94 dated 13.4.1994 and he remained in Great Himalayan National Park Shamshi from 26.12.1994 to 18.11.1996. The applicant was further transferred to Nagrota Surian Wild Life Range of Chamba Wild Life Division vide Chief Conservator of Forests (Wild Life) Himachal Pradesh office order No.38/96 dated 20.8.1996 within Wild life wing. The seniority list of the applicant was required to be maintained in Kullu Division/Circle. The Seniority list of the Forest guards prepared by the Conservator of Forests, Kullu vide his letter No. B-8-D.50/2917 dated 15.7.1997. The name of the applicant has been shown at Sr. No.191 which should have been at Sr. No.50 above the name of Shri Budh Ram and below the name of Shri Hari Chand-II as per benefit of putting in 16 years military services allowed vide H.P. Govt. letter No. Fts.(i)B(7)-5/86- III dated 23.11.1994 (Annexed R-I). 3 6(ix). The contents of the para are denied, as Annexure A-4 of the O.A. is a mere list of the Forest Guards and not the seniority list. It is further submitted for the information of this Hon'ble Court that the seniority lists of the Forest Guards are maintained in the parent circle in which they are initially appointed. The applicant's name in the seniority list was inadvertently left out because of his posting in wild life wing temporarily, which is now being refixed. The instructions in this regard have already been issued by Pr. Chief Conservator of Forests Himachal Pradesh to Conservator of Forests, Kullu vide his letter No. Ft.436-30/78(OA)E.II dated 10.6.2003 Annexure R-(V&VI). (x). As submitted in para (ix) above the seniority of the Forest Guards is maintained circle wiseby the concerned Conservator of Forests. The seniority of the applicant was not maintained by the Conservator of Kullu. Temporarily inadvertently owing to his transfer from Great Himalayan National park Shamshi to Wild Life Division Chamba now Wild life Division Hamirpur for which necessary instructions have been issued by Pr. Chief Conservator of Forests Himachal Pradesh vide his Memo. No. Ft.436-30/78/OA(E.II) dated 10.6.2004 (Annexure R-VI) with the direction to process the promotion case of the applicant from the date4 of his juniors have been promoted. ” 3. Rejoinder refuting the above stand on behalf of the respondents and reiterating the averments set up in the petition has 4 been filed. 4. In view of the above reply, in case the petitioner still has any surviving grievance, he shall be free to make a representation along with copy of this judgment to the respondents/competent authority within one month from today, who shall consider the same and take a final decision in the matter within next three months in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, if so desired. 5. The petition stands disposed of, so also pending CMP(s), if any. (V.K. Sharma) Judge 22nd March, 2011. (jai)