IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 8168 of 2011. Decided on: September 19, 2011. Sharda Devi. Vrs. State of HP & ors. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioner: Mr. R.L. Chaudhary, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. AG with Mr. J.K.Verma, Dy. AG for respondents NO. 1 to 3. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:- “(i) That writ of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the Respondent No. 2 to accommodate petitioner in Ayurvedic Health Centre Anni, District Kullu against the post of Class-IV employee i.e. trained Dai/Midwife in view of the fact that the petitioner has to look-after her four children who are studying and her husband who is 70 years old and he requires permanent care by the petitioner due to illness of old age and furthermore, the petitioner is suffering from serious gynae problem and Ayurvedic Health Centre Poeg is approximately 60 Kms. away and the petitioner has to travel 120 Kms. each day, but from July, 2010 she was on deputation in Ayurvedic Health Centre, Anni which is 13 Kms. away from the house of the petitioner but now in order to accommodate Respondent No. 4, the petitioner has been sent to Ayurvedic Health Centre Poeg. Although, petitioner has served for 8 years in Ayurvedic Health Centre Poeg from July, 2002 till July, 2010. (ii) That writ of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the Respondent No. 2 to decide the representation of the petitioner as per Annexure P-4 dated 25.8.2011. (iii) That writ in the nature of certiorari may kindly be issued and the Office Order dated 12.7.2011 Annexure P-3 issued by the Respondent No. 3, may very kindly be quashed and set aside” 2. Since the petitioner has submitted Annexure P-4, representation and the same is pending before the second respondent, we do not think it necessary to issue notice to the party respondents and consider the matter on 2 merits since the parties will get sufficient opportunity before the second respondent, if required. There will be direction to the second respondent to consider Annexure P-4 on merits and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of production of copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition by the petitioner before the second respondent. In the process in case respondents No. 4 and 5 are likely to be affected, they shall be afforded an opportunity of hearing along with the petitioner. 3. The Writ Petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. September 19, 2011. ( Justice Sanjay Karol), (karan/vs) Judge.