IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.W.P.(T) No. 4824 of 2008. Decided on: 26.07.2010. Ram Lal and another. …Petitioners. -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. Neel Kamal Sood, Advocate. For respondents No. 1 to 3. : Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. None for respondents No. 4 and 5. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): The case of the petitioners, in a nut-shell, is that they are holding higher posts vis-à-vis Class-IV employees. However, it is evident from Annexure A-5 that the names of the petitioners figure in this list alongwith other Class-IV employees. According to the existing Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 10% vacancies are to be filled up by promotion from Class-IV employees of the same Deputy Commissioner’s office. It is not disputed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties that respondents No. 4 and 5 ranks senior to the petitioners as per Annexure A-5. 2. Consequently, no directions can be issued to the respondents, save and except that the case of the petitioners shall be considered for promotion to the post of Clerk against 10% 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. quota in accordance with law, as and when the vacancies are available. Ordered accordingly. The petition stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge July, 26, 2010. (bhupender)