IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 2594 of 2008. Decided on: 15.12.2010. __________________________________________________________ Subhash Chand Sud. … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh another. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajnish K. Lall, Advocate vice Mr. Suneet Goel, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, J. (oral): In sequel to the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner on 3rd October, 2010, reply has been filed. Para-1 of the reply reads thus:- “That it is submitted that the untrained period of in service teachers who had undergone B. Ed. Training as mentioned in para 1 A to G in the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner, has already been regularized and treated as study leave and financial benefit has also been given to such persons by the respondent-Stte. It is further submitted that the above mentioned benefit has not been given to the petitioner so far. However, his case was taken up with the Government for approval, which is awaited.” 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - 2. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner as per contents of para-1 quoted hereinabove, within a period of two months after the production of certified copy of this judgment. The pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. December 15, 2010. (sck).