IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP. No. 4108 of 2009. Date of Decision:6.9.2010.. _______________________________________________ Satinder kaur. ….Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. ….Respondents. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. Whether approved for reporting1? No. For the petitioner :Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate. For Respondents. :Mr.P.K.Sharma, Addl. Advocate General. Dev Darshan Sud, J.(Oral). It is undisputed before me that the subject matter of controversy in this writ petition was decided on the principle of law in CWP No 3912 of 2009 along with other petitions which petitions were disposed of by direction of a Division Bench of this Court that they should be treated as representations. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that after the cases were remanded to the Secretary Education for decision, the representations have been rejected and in these circumstances, the order of rejection requires to be challenged afresh in accordance with law. He seeks permission to file fresh petition challenging the order Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment?yes . 2 passed by the Secretary Education to the Govt. of Himachal Pradesh. Permission granted. The writ petition is disposed of as having become infructuous. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to challenge the order of rejection of his representation by the Secretary Education. (Dev Darshan Sud), Judge. September 6, 2010(R)