IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 12403 of 2008. Decided on: 01.04.2011. _______________________________________________ Sushela Devi and others. … Petitioners. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioners : Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Anshul Bansal, Additional Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, J. (Oral): In view of the supplementary affidavit filed by the respondent-State, Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, learned counsel for the petitioners prays for and is permitted to withdraw the present petition in order to enable his clients to make representation(s) for framing of Scheme/Guidelines for the purpose of regularization. 2. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn. However, the petitioners are permitted to make representation(s) within a period of three weeks from today for the 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - redressal of their grievance including framing of the Scheme for their regularization, to the Secretary, Panchayati Raj. The Secretary, Panchayati Raj shall decide the representation(s) made by the petitioners within a period of two months after the production of certified copy of this judgment. He shall also take into consideration the appointment of the petitioners to the post of Tailoring and Cutting Mistresses for more than a decade. He shall pass a speaking/reasoned order. The pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. April 01, 2011. (sck).