IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 3635 of 2009. Date of decision: 2.7.2010. Diwan Chand ….. Petitioner Vs. State of H.P. and others …. Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner : Mr. Neel Kamal Sood, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. P.K. Sharma, Addl. Advocate General with Mrs. Shubh Mahajan, Dy. Advocate General, for the respondents. Kuldip Singh, J (Oral) The learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his submission only to the extent that a direction may be given to respondent No.2 to decide the representation dated 6.8.2007 which was addressed by the petitioner to Addl. Director Higher Education, Shimla within some time bound period. Not opposed. In these circumstances, the respondent No.2 is directed to decide the representation dated 6.8.2007 Annexure P-12 and he shall also consider the letter dated 7.3.2007 Annexure P-14 while deciding the representation. The respondent No.2 shall decide the representation dated 6.8.2007 by a speaking order within six Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petition stands disposed of. ( Kuldip Singh ), Judge. July 2, 2010 (sks)