THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 3077 of 2008 Decided on: 02.08.2010 T.K. Rajagopalan Nair …Petitioner -Versus- State of Himachal Pradesh and another. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1. For the petitioners. : None. For the respondents : Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral) : The petitioner has earlier approached earstwhile learned Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal by way of OA No. 276 of 2008. The original application was directed to be treated as representation to respondent No. 2, vide order dated 18.09.1995. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary (Agriculture) dismsised the representation vide Annexure A-2/A dated 26.02.1996. 2. A bare perusal of order dated 26.02.1996 reveals that the same is neither speaking nor reasoned . He ought to have given reasons why the petitioner was not found suitable on the basis of existing Recruitment and Promotion Rules, by referring to the particular Rules. 3. Consequently, Annexure A-2/A, dated 26.02.1996 is quashed and set aside. The respondent-State is directed to re-consider the representation of the petitioner by passing a speaking order within 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? . -2- a period of 10 weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this judgment. 4. In light of above, the petition stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge August 2, 2010 (K. Attri)