Halki Devi vs The State of Himachal Pradesh and others

It is seen that petitioner has made representation dated 19.08.2017 (Annexure P-30) to the respondents, bringing out her grievances, which is still pending before the authority concerned.

Without pressing the petition on merits, learned counsel for the petitioner, under instructions, submits that petitioner shall be content if a direction is issued to the respondents/competent authority to decide representation dated 19.08.2017 (Annexure P-30) expeditiously. Mr. J.K. Verma, learned Deputy Advocate General, has no objection to the above request.

No other point is urged.

Leaving the questions of law open, a direction is issued to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioner?s representation dated 19.08.2017 (Annexure P-30), in accordance with law, by affording due opportunity of hearing/representation to the petitioner, within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Petitioner is at liberty to place additional material on record. Needless to add, if the order is not in favour of the petitioner, the authority shall assign reasons while deciding the same, which shall be communicated to the petitioner. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the Court, if need so arises subsequently.

With these directions, the petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.