JUDGMENT : Heard the parties. 1. The petitioner has approached this Court with multiple prayer, but now confines his prayer only for a direction upon the respondent to revise his pension. 2. At the very outset, Mr. Ravi Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that suffice it would be if the present writ petition be treated as a representation of the petitioner and a direction is given to the respondents to pass a reasoned order on the representation of the petitioner, in accordance with law, within stipulated time. 3. Per contra, counter-affidavit has been filed. However, learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents do not object to the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, let the present writ petition be treated as a representation of the petitioner. Further, the petitioner is directed to approach the respondents with a copy of this writ petition and a copy of this order and with any other document on which he is relying upon, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the same, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner and pass a speaking order assigning valid and concrete reason for consideration /non-consideration of the case of the petitioner after giving an opportunity of personal hearing/representative to the petitioner, in accordance with law with a copy of order to the petitioner, within a period of six weeks thereafter. It is made clear that if the petitioner is found entitled for the benefit as claimed in prayer portion, same shall be extended to him, within a further period of two weeks’. 5. Needless to say that this Court has not entered into the merits of this case. 6. With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.