JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court against the adverse entries in the service record. In the reply filed on behalf of the Government, it is stated as follows: “6(ii) In reply to this para it is submitted that the applicant was found habitual of absenting himself from duty as has been reported by the public of the area & on enquiry it was proved, so the entry in his ACRs have been made on facts. He was found absent from his duty by the Deputy Commissioner, Chamba also. Hence, the remarks recorded in his ACRs are based on material facts. (iii) The contents of this para are wrong hence denied. From the Annexure A/II of OA it is very clear that the ACR has been communicated on 1.12.2000, after completing all the codal formalities. Therefore, it is wrong to say that he came to know about the adverse remarks only when the seniority list of AMO was circulated & the applicant was not confirmed.” 2. There is no rejoinder. In case the petitioner is aggrieved with regard to the factual position, it will be open for him to approach the Government. The writ petition stands disposed of.