IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 9727/2008 Decided on:15.12.2010 _____________________________________________ Jagdish Chand. …Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. …Respondents. ________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner : Mr. Harish Dod, Advocate vice Mr. Peeyush Verma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. P.M. Negi, Dy. Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Asstt. A.G. for respondents No. 1 and 2. Mr. P.P. Chauhan, Advocate for respondent No.3. _____________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). Petitioner has already made representation against the promotion of respondent No.3. The same is still pending. 2. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the Principal Secretary (Education) to decide the representation (Annexure P-4) dated 30.6.2003 by passing a speaking order. Petitioner shall he given personal 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 hearing. In the eventuality of the representation of the petitioner being decided in his favour, he shall be entitled to all the consequential benefits. Needful be done within a period of two months after the production of certified copy of this judgment within a period of two months by the petitioner. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge 15.12.2010 *awasthi*