RAM NATH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Court, while meteing an adjudication, upon, CWP No. 606 of 2021, on 1/2/2021, had made directions upon the petitioner, as well as, upon the respondents concerned, and, the apposite directions are carried in paragraph-4 of the afore order, paragraph whereof is extracted hereinafter:

(2.) The learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record, scribed instructions, detailing therein, that compliance to the order supra stands meted by the respondent concerned. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits, that, though the petitioner has given five stations of his choice to the respondent concerned, yet, the instructions of the respondents, do not reveal, that he has become posted in any of the five stations of his choice, as, had been represented to the respondent concerned, and, that it hence appears that the verdict supra remains uncomplied with.

(3.) However, at this stage, the learned Additional Advocate General, submits that the petitioner has, pursuant to order of 24/8/2021, joined at GSSS Karyuni, District Chamba, H.P. The learned counsel for the petitioner, does not contest, the afore made submission, before this Court, by the learned Additional Advocate General. Therefore, even if, there is prima- facie non compliance, vis-a-vis, the afore directions, made by this Court, upon, the respondent concerned, yet, the joining of the petitioner at GSSS Karyuni, District Chamba, H.P. does tantamount to his acquiescing to the afore made posting, at the afore station, and, also his posting is construable to a waiver of his right, if any, to seek his being posted to any of the five stations of his choice, as, carried in the representation, as made to the respondents in pursuance to the directions supra.