Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (Oral)

Mr. Dinesh Bhanot, learned counsel for the writ petitioner, stated at the Bar that he is under instructions not to file rejoinder. His statement is taken on record. Accordingly, right of the writ petitioner to file rejoinder is closed.

2. By the medium of this writ petition, the writ petitioner has sought quashment of order, dated 24.08.2015 (Annexure A6), made by the H.P. State Administrative Tribunal (for short "the Tribunal") in OA No. 2799 of 2015, titled as Lalit Mohan versus H.P. Public Service Commission (for short "the Commission") wherein and whereunder his prayer for interim relief has been rejected by the Tribunal (for short "the impugned order").

3. In nutshell, the writ petitioner has questioned the result of the preliminary examination of the Himachal Pradesh Administrative Services Combined Competitive Examination conducted by the respondent-Commission, in which he has been declared to be unsuccessful.

4. It is apt to record herein that after participating in the preliminary examination, the writ petitioner has filed objections in terms of the mechanism in place, viz-a-viz questions No. 67, 74 and 84 of Booklet Series "