IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 9337 of 2008 Decided on 1.4.2011 Jia Lal Thakur ……….Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & others. ...….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Dilip Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anshul Bansal, Additional Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 & 2. Mr. D.K. Khanna, Advocate, for respondent No. 3. Mr. D.P. Gupta, vice Mr. K.D. Shreedhar, Advocate, for respondent No. 4. Rajiv Sharma, J. (Oral) It has come in para 3 of the reply filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3 that the seniority of Inspector Wireless has been re-drawn on 18th October, 2003, vide Annexure R-I. Petitioner has been assigned proper place in the seniority list, as per the instructions of the Personnel Department. 2. Consequently, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider the case of 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?. the petitioner for promotion, on the basis of re-drawn seniority list issued on 18th October, 2003. Needless to say, he will be entitled to all the consequential benefits. The pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge April 1, 2011 (hl)