CWP(T) No. 8014 of 2008. 09.07.2009 Present: Mr. J.L. Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. R.K. Sharma, Senior Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Additional Advocate General, for the respondents. The case of the petitioner, in nut shell, is that he has not been paid the salary w.e.f. 1st April, 2001. The case of the State is that he was dis-engaged w.e.f. 1st April, 2001. He was asked to do forestry works in Pangi Forest Division, but he refused to do so. Mr. J.L. Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that the petitioner had been holding the keys of the Rest House and had been attending the guests. In other words, his submission is that despite the disengagement of the petitioner w.e.f. 1st April, 2001, he had been continuously working at the Rest House. The petitioner has not placed any tangible evidence on record to substantiate his plea that he had been working despite his disengagement w.e.f. 1st April, 2001. In case he was working, he was supposed to mark his presence or was required to be issued with the muster roll. : 2 : In these circumstances, the only conclusion which can be drawn is that the petitioner was dis-engaged w.e.f. 1st April, 2001 and had not been working with the respondent-department. Consequently, he is not entitled to salary w.e.f. 1st April, 2001. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. July 9, 2009. Bhupender