IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 1065 of 2010. Decided on: 30th March, 2010. Surindra Kumari . …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. J.L. Bhardwaj, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. Advocate General, with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. Advocate General for respondents No.1 to 3. None for respondent No. 4. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) CMP No. 1506 of 2010 Allowed. Application is disposed of. CWP No. 1065 of 2010 The writ petition has been filed with the following prayers: “i) The impugned seniority list as circulated vide Annexure ‘P-2’ may kindly be quashed and set aside and the petitioner may be assigned the seniority on the basis of recommendations made by the H.P. Public Service Commission strictly as per the merit obtained in the written examination conducting for the appointment of Laboratory Assistants and petitioner may be shown senior to the respondent No. 4. ii) That the impugned order dated 18.07.2007 making promotions of respondent No. 4 vide Annexure P-3 may kindly also be quashed and set aside. iii) That the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 may be directed to assign the seniority to the petitioner on the basis of merit list as per the recommendations made by the H.P. Public Service Commission and further the petitioner may be promoted to the post of Senior Laboratory Technician from the date when she became eligible and not later than 18.07.2007, when the posts were available and junior has been promoted. iv) That the respondents may be directed to promote the petitioner to the post of Senior Laboratory Technician w.e.f. 18.07.2007 on which date the respondent No. 4 has been promoted and further all the benefits flowing thereto may also be released along including seniority and arrears etc. including interest @ 12% per annum from the date it fell due till its realization.” It is seen that the petitioner has made Annexure P-5, representation and the matter has been recommended by the third respondent also. Therefore, there will be a direction to the second respondent to look into Annexure P-5, representation, taking note also of the recommendation made by the third respondent and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law with notice to the petitioner, third and forth respondents and any other effected party. The order, as above shall be passed within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of writ petition. The petitioner will also serve a copy of this judgment and the copy of the writ petition to the forth respondent as well. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice March 30, 2010. (Justice R.B. Misra), (tr/vs) Judge.