JUDGMENT Rajiv Sharma, J. Petitioner had approached the learned erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal for the redressal of his grievance by way of Original Application No. 1149 of 1995. The learned Tribunal directed the Original Application to be treated as representation to the Board of Directors on 12th June, 1995. The same has been decided on 26th May, 2004 vide Annexure A-1 and was conveyed to the petitioner by the Managing Director of the respondent-Corporation. A bare perusal of the order dated 26th May, 2004 makes it abundantly clear that the same is neither speaking nor detailed. Once the learned Tribunal has directed the Original Application to be treated as representation, the same ought to have been decided by passing a speaking order after taking into consideration the grounds/pleas taken therein. 2. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Annexure A-1, dated 26.05.2004 is quashed and set aside. The Board of Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. Directors of the respondent-Corporation is directed to decide the representation afresh after taking into consideration the grounds/pleas taken therein by passing a speaking order, within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner to the petitioner. No costs.