IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 8488 of 2008. Decided on 7th December, 2010. Karam Chand Rai. …Petitioner. -Versus- State of H.P. …Respondent. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. P.P. Chauhan, Advocate. For the respondent. : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Petitioner has already made representations for the redressal of his grievance to the Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, Department of Technical Education, Government of Himachal Pradesh vide Annexures A-7 to A-8, dated 22.02.2001, 09.04.2002, respectively. However, the same have not been decided till date. In normal circumstances, the representations ought to have been decided by the competent authority. However, in the interest of justice, the Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, Department of Technical Education, Government of Himachal Pradesh is directed to decide the representations made by the petitioner vide Annexures A-7 to A-8, dated 22.02.2001, 09.04.2002, respectively by a speaking/reasoned order, within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner. The petitioner shall also 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?No. - 2 - be heard in person and for that purpose, the date will be separately notified to him. 2. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the petition stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge December 07, 2010. (bhupender) - 3 -