KRISHAN KUMAR SUMAN Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CMP (T) No. 174 of 2011 Reply not filed. Heard.

(2.) THE application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, is allowed in view of the grounds stated therein. Consequently, judgment dated 10.11.2010, pursuant to which Civil Review (T) No. 26 of 2008 Krishan Kumar V. State of H.P. and Anr. was disposed of pursuant to the statement at the bar made by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, is recalled. Resultantly, Civil Review (T) No. 26 of 2008 shall stand restored for disposal on merits. Civil Review No. 26 of 2008

(3.) IN nutshell the grievance raised by the Petitioner, who at the relevant time was working as Junior Scale Stenographer, in the Respondent -Corporation since the year 1986, was that he was stagnating against the said post for want of any promotional avenues. However, while passing the impugned order dated 06.03.1997 the learned Tribunal observed in para 4 thereof as under: We find that since separate Recruitment and Promotion rules have been provided for the post of Senior Assistant and Personal Assistant, the applicant being a feeder category to the post of Personal Assistant only and not to senior Assistant, he cannot claim promotion to the category of Senior Assistant in violation of Recruitment and promotion rules.