CWP No.3977 of 2009 24.8.2011 Present: Mr. B.C. Negi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. Ajay Mohan Goel, Advocate, for respondent No.2. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner’s representation having not been decided by a speaking order, as in the case of Chura Mani Thakur, whose CWP No.2219 decided on 8.7.2010, has been disposed of with a direction to the Competent Authority to decide the representation afresh, present petition may also be disposed of, with a similar direction, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to make a supplementary representation. I have gone through the record. In this case also, there is no speaking order. In fact, no order for the rejection of the representation of the petitioner has been passed by the competent authority, as was the case in Chura Mani Thakur’s matter. So, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that Competent Authority (Hon’ble the Chief Justice) shall consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 20.4.2009, copy Annexure P-9, alongwith his supplementary representation, if any, and pass appropriate orders thereon. August 24, 2011(ss) (Surjit Singh), J