IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.W.P(T) No. 4863 of 2008. Decided on: 31st August, 2010. Santosh Devi. …Petitioner. -Versus- State 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. Onkar Jairath, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Mr. Onkar Jairath, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has made a representation for the redressal of her grievance to the competent authority. However, the same has not been decided till date. 2. Consequently, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the Principal Secretary (Education) to decide the pending representation made by the petitioner by passing a speaking order within a period of ten weeks after the receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. It is made clear that it case the representation of the petitioner is accepted, she will be entitled to all the consequential benefits. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge August 31, 2010. (bhupender) 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No.