JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Sharma, J.

1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 20.9.2012, passed by Principal Secretary (Home) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, whereby representation, having been filed by the petitioner in terms of judgment dated 21.5.2012 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 8138 of 2010-J, came to be rejected, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for following relief:-

"It is therefore respectfully prayed that keeping in view the averments made in the petition, the preset petition may kindly be allowed and impugned annexures P-5 & P-9, letters dated 18.09.2010 & 20.9.2012 may please be ordered to be quashed and set-aside by issuing a writ of certiorari, with the directions to the respondents to review the DPC proceedings as prayed for in the representation with the further directions to the respondents to assign the appropriate/correct place to the petitioner in the merit list keeping in view the entries made in his ACR's & promote him earlier in point of time before all the respondents 4-9, after comparing the entries made in their ACR's & to redraw annexure P-3 & to grant all the consequential benefits including the arrears of pay to the petitioner with interest @ 18% per annum in the interest of justice & keeping in view the submissions made here in above."

2. For having bird's eye view, certain undisputed facts as emerge from the record are that the petitioner initially was recruited as Sub-Inspector of Police in the respondent Department on 9th July, 1996. In the year 2001, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Inspector, whereafter in that capacity he remained posted at various Police stations in the State and headed the police stations in the capacity of Station House Officer. On 7.4.2007, the petitioner was confirmed as Inspector in the respondent department. On 30.09.2008, the Departmental Promotion Committee (for short 'DPC') in its meeting also considered the name of the petitioner alongwith other eligible candidates against 18 general vacancies of Dy. S.P. After assessing ACRs of all the eligible candidates, DPC recommended the name of the petitioner and other eligible candidates for being promoted to the post of Dy. S.P., in order of merit, to the H.P. Police Service (Class-I-Gazetted), in the Department of police, Himachal Pradesh, where the name of petitioner finds mention at Sr. No. 14. Since, the petitioner was expecting his placement higher in the merit list drawn by DPC in its meeting held on 30.9.2008, he applied for information under Right to Information Act, 2005 with regard to his entries made in the Annual Confidential Reports (ACR's). Since petitioner was graded as "Outstanding" officer for the relevant years, which were to be taken into consideration while considering his case for promotion to the post of Dy. S.P. and DPC of its own without affording him an opportunity of being heard proceeded to downgrade his entries, petitioner preferred a detailed representation dated 22.7.2010 (Annexure P-4), requesting therein to review the proceedings of DPC held on 30.9.2008 with further prayer to place him at appropriate place in the promotion list of DSP of 2008. However, fact remains that representation of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 18.9.2010 (Annexure P-5). Petitioner with a view to know the reasons for rejection of the representation again applied under Right to Information Act, 2005, wherein he was informed that DPC might have considered the gradations of ACR's of the petitioner as "Very Good" instead of "Outstanding" and as such, he approached this Court by way of CWP No. 8138 of 2010-J.

3. Since grounds/pleas taken by the petitioner in the representation were not considered and decided by the competent authority and no specific reason was assigned, Co-ordinate bench of this Court vide judgment dated 21.5.2012 allowed the writ petition bearing CWP No. 8138 of 2010-J having been filed by the pe