IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 16728 of 2008. Decided on: 07.09.2010. __________________________________________________________ Stephen Dean. … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Mr. Neel Kamal Sood, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General for respondent No.1. None for respondents No.2 to 4. Rajiv Sharma, J. (Oral): Petitioner has already made a representation to the Chief Executive Officer of the respondent-Board vide Annexure A-17, dated 8.5.1996 for the redressal of his grievance. The same has not been decided by the respondents till date. In the interest of justice, the respondent-Board is directed to decide the representation made by the petitioner vide Annexure A-17 by passing a speaking order, within a period of two months after production of the certified copy of this judgment. In case the representation is decided in favour of the petitioner, he shall be held entitled to all the consequential benefits. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - 2. Accordingly, in view of the observations made hereinabove, the petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. There will be no order as to costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. September 07, 2010. (sck).