IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 8527 of 2010. Decided on: 28th December, 2010. Rajinder Singh. ….Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and another. …. Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. Vikas Rajput, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. J.K. Verma, DAG. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayer: “(i) Respondent No.2 may kindly be directed to decide the matter as per direction made by respondent No.1 in annexure P-2.” 2. The petitioner is aggrieved since the second respondent is not implementing the direction issued by the first respondent, Secretary (Education). Therefore, the petitioner prays that a direction may be issued to the second respondent to take a timely decision as per the direction of the first respondent. If the direction issued by the first respondent is not carried out, it is not for the petitioner to invoke the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under 2 Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is for the petitioner to approach the Secretary himself, who will be in a position to issue appropriate direction to the second respondent to take a time bound action. Thus approaching the first respondent, the first respondent will see that the second respondent complies with the lawful direction issued by him within a time bound period. The needful, as above, shall be done on the production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition by the petitioner. 3. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 28th December, 2010 ( Justice V.K. Ahuja), (tr) Judge.