CWP(T) 3231/2008 (OA 733/05) and CWP(T) 4902/2008 (OA 3003/2002) 01.04.2009 Present: Mr. P.P. Chauhan, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Additional Advocate General with Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur, Additional Advocate General, for the respondents. Mr. P.P. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner(s), invited my attention to the following decisions: 1. CWP No. 455/1976 “Kumar Singh Acharya Vs. Director of Education dated 18.12.1978. 2. T.A. No. 708/1986, 91/86 & 106/87 “ Hari Dutt Sharma Vs. State dated 3.8.1993. 3. O.A. No. 1111/1994 “Hem Prabh Vs. State dated 30.3.1998 and 16.11.2000. 4. 2007(2) Current Law Journal 12. After the matter was heard for sometime, Mr. P.P. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly stated that his client shall make a representation to the Government within four weeks from today, placing on record the entire material including the aforesaid decisions. Mr. R.K. Sharma, Learned Senior Additional Advocate General states that in the event of the petitioner making his representation, the Government shall sympathetically consider the same within a period of 12 weeks thereafter. : 2 : Without going into the merits of the petition(s), it is directed that in the event of the petitioner making a representation, the respondents shall decide the same, in accordance with Law by taking into account the material placed by the petitioner and morespecifically, the decisions rendered by the Courts. Needless to add, the Government shall pass a reasoned order, in accordance with Law and communicate the same to the petitioner. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the Court, if need so arises. Both the petitions are disposed of in terms of above orders. (Sanjay Karol) Judge. April 1, 2009. bhupender