IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP (T) No.12494 of 2008 Date of decision : May 27, 2011 Shiv Kumar …Petitioner. Versus H.R.T.C. and others …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Advocate. Surjit Singh, Judge(Oral) Heard and gone through the record. 2. Petitioner confines the relief only to the recovery part, which had been ordered vide Annexure A- 11 (dated 6th June, 2005). Writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to consider the case of the petitioner, for waiver of recovery, in the light of the following judgments: 1. Shyam Babu Verma and others versus Union of India and others, (1994) 2 SCC 521. 2. Col. B.J. Akkara (Retd.) versus Government of India and others, (2006) 11 SCC 709. 3. Syed Abdul Quadir and others versus State of Bihar and others, (2009) 3 SCC 475. Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… 4. Registrar, Cooperative Societies Haryana and others versus Israil Khan and others, (2010) 1 SCC 440. 5. CWP(T) No.8112/2008, titled as Prem Chand and others versus State of H.P. and others, decided on 23rd March, 2010. 3. A speaking order shall be passed by respondent No.1, after affording the petitioner an opportunity to file a detailed representation, if so desired by him. Petitioner shall be given 15 days time for the purpose. Thereafter, the matter shall be disposed of by respondent No.1, within one month. Recovery order shall remain suspended till respondent No.1 passes a speaking order, in terms of the aforesaid direction. Petition stands disposed of. May 27, 2011(sd) ( Surjit Singh ), J