IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 8224 of 2008. Decided on 7th December, 2010. Amrit Lal Thakur. …Petitioner. -Versus- State of H.P. and Others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Advocate. For the respondents. : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Case of the petitioner, in a nut-shell, is that the respondent-State is giving artificial/fictional breaks to him. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his client is still continuing, however, the respondents are giving artificial/ fictional breaks to deprive him the status of regularization. If that is so, the respondents are directed not to give artificial/fictional breaks to the petitioner henceforth. 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? - 2 - - 3 -