IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 5593 of 2008. Decided on: 27th October, 2010. Udham Singh. .….. Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & ors. …. .. Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. For the petitioner : None. For the Respondents : Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayers: (i) The respondents 1 to 3 may be directed to promote the applicant as Head Constable from the date respondent No.4 has been promoted. (ii) The applicant be also paid arrears with other benefits.” 2. In the reply at para 6, it is stated as under: “6. The contents of this para are admitted to the extent that the applicant was recruited as Const. in the Police Deptt. w.e.f. 26.11.62. It is, however, wrong to contend that the applicant has rendered blotless service as he has been censured on 27.4.89 and 23.9.97. It is also wrong to contend that the respondent No.4 is less meritorious than the applicant. The applicant who was recruited in 1962 has earned only 7 good entries whereas respondent No.4 who was recruited in 1988 has earned 5 good entries and has an excellent performance in band. It is further submitted in reply to this para that the respondent No.4 has been promoted on 13.1.94 by relaxing the normal Rules under Rule 13.21 of Punjab Police Rule (as applicable to State of H.P.) for his excellent performance in Band and not against 10% exemptee quota as contended. The applicant has no cause to be promoted by relaxing the normal rules, though he is senior by virtue of his appointment in the Deptt. The applicant has thus no claim for promotion against the respondent No.4. The promotion of the respondent No.4 is legal and just and needs to be upheld. The averment regarding promotion made by the applicant is totally wrong and baseless.” 3. In case the petitioner has any dispute with respect to the above factual position, it will be open to him to point out the same before the first respondent, in which case the first respondent will consider the matter and take appropriate action in accordance with law within another four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment by the petitioner. 4. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 27th October, 2010 (Justice Kuldip Singh), (tr) Judge.