High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Sardul Singh Romana vs State Of Punjab & Others on 27 October, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sardul Singh Romana vs State Of Punjab & Others on 27 October, 2009
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH



                            Civil Writ Petition No.14027 of 2007
                                  Date of Decision: October 27, 2009


Sardul Singh Romana
                                                  .....PETITIONER(S)

                                VERSUS


State of Punjab & Others
                                                 .....RESPONDENT(S)
                            .     .      .


CORAM:          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA


PRESENT: -      Mr. Rakesh Sharma, Advocate, for
                Mr.    Rajinder   Kumar    Singla,

Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Charu Tuli, Senior Deputy
Advocate General, Punjab, for
respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 5.

None for respondent Nos.4, 5 and
7.

. . .

AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)

This petition has been filed under

Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India

praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of

certiorari, quashing Order dated 22.8.2007

(Annexure P-35) passed by respondent No.2 i.e.

State of Punjab, Department of Technical

Education & Industrial Training, Punjab, whereby

the petitioner has been transferred from

Government Polytechnic, Bathinda to Government
CWP No.14027 of 2007 [2]

Polytechnic, Ferozepur.

Learned counsel for the respondent-

State contends that cause of action does not

survive any more in so much as operation of the

impugned order was not stayed. Subsequently, the

petitioner was transferred to Ludhiana. The

petitioner has already proceeded on leave for

self employment from 3.11.2008 to 2.11.2011.

In view of the statement made by

learned counsel for the respondent-State, no

adjudication is required in the matter.

The petition is disposed of.


                                                       (AJAI LAMBA)
October 27, 2009                                          JUDGE
avin



1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?