IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.16818 of 2011 Date of Decision.28.09.2011 Sanjeev Sharma son of Mohinder Pal resident of village Ganjbar, Post Office Babarpur, District Panipat .....Petitioner Versus Union of India through its Secretary to Government External Affairs, Govt. of India, New Delhi and others .....Respondents Present: Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate for Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that he will be satisfied if the writ petition is to be treated as representation and Annexure P-4 be decided by the 2nd respondent within a particular period. 2. The writ petition shall be treated as representation. The 2nd respondent shall consider the same and take a decision within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 3. The writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission, dispensing with notice to the respondents. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE September 28, 2011 Pankaj*