High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Prof. Vijay Kumar Sharma & Others vs State Of Punjab & Another on 28 July, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Prof. Vijay Kumar Sharma & Others vs State Of Punjab & Another on 28 July, 2009
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH



                                Civil Writ Petition No.5366 of 2009
                                       Date of Decision: July 28, 2009


Prof. Vijay Kumar Sharma & Others
                                                   .....PETITIONER(S)

                                VERSUS


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


CORAM:          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA


PRESENT: -      Mr. Naresh Ghai,                 Advocate,       for
                the petitioners.

                Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate
                General,    Punjab,   for    the
                respondents.



                            .      .     .

AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)

This civil writ petition has been

filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution

of India for quashing order dated 4.7.2008

(Annexure P-1) wherein the petitioners have been

transferred. The petitioners are regularly

appointed college lecturers. The posts have been

reduced. The persons working on stop gap/ part

time basis, have not been transferred.

Learned counsel for the

respondents, while drawing attention of the Court
CWP No.5366 of 2009 [2]

towards affidavit filed by Mr. Roop Aulakh,

Director of Public Instructions (Colleges),

Punjab, sworn on 29.5.2009, states that the order

of transfer of the petitioners has been reversed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner

states that no cause of action survives.

The petition is disposed of as

having been rendered infructuous, in view of the

statement of learned counsel for the petitioner.


                                                        (AJAI LAMBA)
July 28, 2009                                              JUDGE
avin




1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

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