IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 11845/2008 Decided on:27.12.2010 _____________________________________________ Smt. Leela Devi. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents. ________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner : Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. R.P. Singh, Asstt. A.G. _____________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). Case of the petitioner, in a nutshell, is that she had preferred a representation Annexure A-4 for the redressal of her grievance. The same has been rejected vide Annexure A-6 without a speaking order. Once, the representation had been preferred, it ought to have been decided by a speaking/detailed order. 2. Consequently, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to reconsider the 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No 2 representation of the petitioner, Annexure A-4, and pass a speaking/detailed order within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge 27.12.2010 *awasthi*