IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 8242 of 2008. Decided on 7th December, 2010. Rajinder Singh. …Petitioner. -Versus- State of Himachal Pradesh and Others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. Jagdish Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents. : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Mr. Jagdish Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that the present petition is rendered infructuous due to intervening developments. However, he seeks liberty of the Court to claim salary for the vacation period. Prayer allowed. Accordingly, the petitioner is permitted to make a representation to the second respondent for the payment of salary of the vacation period, in accordance with law, within a period of one month from today. Consequently, there shall be direction to the second respondent to consider the representation to be made by the petitioner, within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner. 2. With the aforesaid observations /directions, the petition stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge December 07, 2010. (bhupender) 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - - 3 -