IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No. 393 of 2010 Decided on: 21.4.2011 Suresh Kumar …Petitioner Versus Shri Srikant Baldi and others …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1. For the petitioner : Mr. Rama Kant Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anshul Bansal, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Vikas Rathore, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. _______________________________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral) : The Court has made following observations in the judgment dated 23.6.2010, rendered in CWP(T) No. 644 of 2008, which read as under: “Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for making him whole time Water Carrier. The consequences shall ensue. This be done within a period of ten weeks from today.” 2. In sequel to the notices issued on 23.12.2010, the respondents have filed reply. A bare perusal of the reply filed by the respondents reveals that the petitioner is at serial No. 732 of the seniority list prepared in respect of the Part Time Water Carriers. The 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? -2- incumbents upto serial No. 706 have already been regularized and there are still 26 incumbents, who are senior to the petitioner. 3. Consequently, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization according to the seniority list maintained. Notices are discharged. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge April 21, 2011 (K. Attri)