IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP(T) No.12601 of 2008. Date of decision: 29.3.2011. Mohinder Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the Petitioner : Mr.Tek Chand Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr.Vivek Singh Thakur, Addl.A.G. Deepak Gupta, J (Oral) 1. The petitioner, by means of this petition, has challenged the notification dated 10th May, 2004 whereby one Sh.Amar Singh Bhandari who was junior to the petitioner was promoted as Executive Engineer. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the post of Executive Engineer fell vacant sometimes in March, 2004 but purposely the post was not filled in with an ulterior motive to give benefit to Sh.Amar Singh Bhandari. According to the petitioner, the State waited Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2 for him to retire on 30th April, 2005 and within 10 days thereafter Sh.Amar Singh Bhandari was promoted. 3. The petitioner is a Diploma holder and both he and Amar Singh Bhandari were to be promoted from amongst the quota of Diploma holders. Though, the petitioner has questioned the promotion of Sh.Amar Singh Bhandari, he did not care to array Sh.Bhandari as respondent in the present petition. In fact very vague allegations have been made that Sh.Bhandari wielded influence since his brother is a senior I.A.S. Officer in the H.P. Secretariat. Even, the brother was not arrayed as a respondent in the case. 4. The stand of the State is that the DPC could not be held since the DPC members were not available and the DPC could be held only on 7.5.2005. Further more, the stand of the State is that the post of Executive Engineer, Nahan was not taken into account since it was not in the cadre strength of HPPWD. 3 5. This Court had given an opportunity to the petitioner whether he wants to array Sh.Amar Singh Bhandari or his brother as respondents in the case but the petitioner did not choose to do so. Without setting aside the appointment of Sh.Amar Singh Bhandari, no relief can be granted to the petitioner because the petitioner was appointed against the post meant for Diploma holders. If the petition is accepted then Sh.Amar Singh Bhandari could not have been promoted and his promotion would have to be set-aside. Similarly, the allegations of mala fides cannot be decided in the absence of the brother of Sh.Amar Singh Bhandari who is alleged to have manipulated delay in the DPC. 6. For the foregoing reasons, no relief can be granted to the petitioner and the petition is dismissed. No costs. March 29, 2011 ( Deepak Gupta ), PV Judge