IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 8384/2008 Decided on:30.3.2011 _____________________________________________ Sukh Dev Singh and others. …Petitioners. Versus Dr. Y.S. Parmar University and others. …Respondents. ________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate. _____________________________________________________ Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). Case of the petitioners, in a nutshell, is that there are no promotional avenues for their category, i.e. Sub-Station Attendants. 2. Mr. Onkar Jairth has drawn the attention of the Court to para 3 (b) of the reply filed by the respondent- University. It is abundantly clear from the perusal of this para that according to the existing Recruitment and promotion Rules, both the cadres, i.e. Electricians as well as Sub-Station Attendants are feeder cadres for promotion to the post of 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Junior Engineer (Electrical). One Sh. S.S. Paul, Electrician has already been promoted to the post of Junior Engineer, as per his seniority in both the cadres, on 22.11.2001. Thus, it cannot be held that there are no promotional avenues available to the petitioners. 3. Consequently, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for promotion to the higher post, in accordance with the Recruitment and Promotion Rules. Pending application(s), if any also stand disposed of. No costs. ( Justice Rajiv Sharma), Judge. 30.3.2011 *awasthi*