Judgment R.P. Vyas, J.-The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer that the respondents be directed to decide the representation/notice for demand of justice (Annexure 4) and fixation of the petitioner may be made on the post of vehicle driver and pay all the arrears as a natural consequence. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed as a Muster Roll employee on 21.03.1979 in the erstwhile Rajasthan State Electricity Board presently designated as Rajasthan Rajya Vidhyut Prasaran Nigma Ltd. (for short the Nigam). 3. Thereafter, the petitioner was fixed on the post of Helper-II by the respondents. 4. The grievance raised by the petitioner in the instant petition is that he is discharging his duties as vehicle driver w.e.f. 210.1979. 5. The petitioner submitted repeated representations for his fixation on the post of Driver, but to no avail. 6. Further case of the petitioner is that an agreement was entered into between the erstwhile Board and Prantiya Vidhyut Mandal Mazdoor Federation dated 22.04.1971. Clause 25 of the Agreement specifically provides that those employees who are discharging their services as vehicle driver and have completed one year continuous service, are entitled to fixation on the post of vehicle driver in regular pay scale. 7. It has also been averred in the writ petition that in conformity with provisions of Clause 25, the Executive Engineer (TD-IV) recommended the case of the petitioner for the fixation as a vehicle driver, but the fixation was not made by the respondents. 8. The petitioner submitted number of representation, however, no heed was paid by the respondents. 9. Lastly, the petitioner submitted a notice for demand of justice 03.07.2001 (Annexure 4). However, the same has also not been responded by the respondents, and no specific order has been passed. Therefore, it has been prayed by the petitioner that the respondents be directed to consider the representation of the petitioner. 10. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that the case of the petitioner for his fixation as vehicle driver has already been considered by the respondents thrice and the same has been rejected. The leaned Counsel for the respondents also submitted that the agreement dated 22.04.1971 which has been referred by the petitioner has already been withdrawn and the same is no more in existence. 11. The leaned Counsel for the respondents also submitted that the agreement dated 22.04.1971 which has been referred by the petitioner has already been withdrawn and the same is no more in existence. 11. Be that as it may, it has been requested by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the respondent No. 2 be directed to consider the representations of the petitioner for his fixation as vehicle driver. Since, the request of the petitioners is only for consideration of the representation, therefore, the instant petition is disposed of at this stage by giving a direction to the respondent No. 2 to consider the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law only. 12. Thus, this writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of in the manner that the petitioner is directed to file a fresh representation within a period of 15 days from today and the respondent No. 2 shall consider and decide the same either way in accordance with law. If it is found that the petitioner is entitled for any relief in accordance with law, then the same may be given to the petitioner and if the petitioner is not found entitled to the relief sought for, then a reasoned and speaking order may be passed strictly in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.