IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 701 of 2011. Decided on 6th April, 2011. Ripan Singh. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & others. …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. For the Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Chandel, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioner is aggrieved since despite being a regular teacher, he is replaced by the 4th respondent, PTA teacher. No doubt, the 4th respondent can work only in Government Senior Secondary School, Sera, being a PTA teacher, whereas the petitioner can work in other school. But the submission is that he has joined the school only since nine months. Be that as it may. In case the 4th respondent is in a position to point out any vacancy where the petitioner is willing to work, the second respondent will adjust the petitioner in that school and against the vacancy at GSSS, Sera the 4th respondent can be continued. The 4th respondent may approach the second respondent only after taking consent of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, 2 Annexure P-4 is set aside with liberty to the second respondent to pass fresh orders on the lines, as indicated above. The petitioner may furnish a copy of this judgment and the copy of the writ petition to the 4th respondent immediately. A copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition shall be produced before the second respondent also by the petitioner. 2. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 6th April, 2011. (Justice V.K. Ahuja), (tr/vt) Judge.