IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP(T) No.12496 of 2008. Date of decision: 06.04.2011. Ranjeet Singh …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, Deputy Advocate General. Deepak Gupta, J (Oral) 1. The relief sought in this petition is that the respondents be directed to consider the petitioner for promotion to the post of Pump Operator w.e.f. 1.5.2005 on which date his juniors have been promoted. 2. Reply to the petition has been filed by the State in which none of the averments made by the petitioner have been controverted. All that is stated in the reply is that the Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2 petitioner has also been promoted w.e.f. 1.7.2005 and has joined without protest. 3. The petition was filed in the month of May, 2005. The petitioner had already lodged his protest by filing the petition. Therefore, it cannot be said that he joined without any protest. Since it has not been controverted that his juniors have been promoted on 1.5.2005, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion on and w.e.f. 1.5.2005 when his juniors were promoted with all consequential benefits i.e. fixation of pay and seniority. The decision in this regard be taken on or before 31st August, 2011. 4. The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. No costs. April 6, 2011 ( Deepak Gupta ), PV Judge