IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No.1085 of 2011. Decided on: 21st March, 2011. Sumesh Chadha. …Petitioner. Versus HP State Industrial Dev. Corpn. Ltd. & others. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Bhatia, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Balwant Kukreja, Advocate, for respondent No.1. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed mainly with the following prayer: “(ii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 15.7.2010 (Annexure P-9) whereby the petitioner in pursuance to the non approval of the change of management by the respondents the supplement guarantee stood revoked and the petitioner liability stood deemed to be discharged from any liability of M/s Des Raj Paper Mills respondent No.3, and further for issuance of no objection certificate to the petitioner for discharge of any liability as no amount was ever released to the company and its Directors or promoters thereafter.” 2 2. It is seen that Annexure P-9, representation dated 15.7.2010 is pending before the first respondent. As prayed for by the learned counsel for the petitioner, there will be a direction to the first respondent to consider Annexure P-9 with notice to the petitioner, second and third respondents and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. This shall be done within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition by the petitioner. The petitioner will also serve each copy of the judgment and the writ petition to the second and third respondents. 3. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 21st March, 2011. (Justice Sanjay Karol), (tr/vt) Judge. 3