IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 7321 of 2008 Decided on: 1.12.2010 Umesh Kumar …Petitioner Versus Govt of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1. No For the petitioner : Mr. Surender Saklani, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. _______________________________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral) : Petitioner made representation to the Chief Engineer for the redressal of his grievances, but the same has not been decided till date. 2. Consequently, the petition is dispsoed of with a direction to the Chief Engineer to decide the representation made by the petitioner by passing a speaking order within a period of two months from today after the production of certified copy of this judgment, by the petitioner. The Chief Engineer, while deciding the case of petitioner, will look into the case of similarly situate person Bhag Chand Sharma. However, Mr. R.P. Singh, learned Assistant Advocate General submits that after filing the petition, Bhag Chand Sharma was 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No -2- reverted. On the other side, Mr. Surinder Saklani, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though he was reverted back, however, he has been again promoted to the post in question. The petitioner shall also be afforded an opportunity of personal hearing. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge December 1, 2010 (K. Attri)