High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Surinder Pal vs Director Of Publis Instructions … on 16 December, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Surinder Pal vs Director Of Publis Instructions … on 16 December, 2009
        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

                              CHANDIGARH.




                                       Civil Writ Petition No. 19105 of 2008

                             DATE OF DECISION : DECEMBER 16, 2009




SURINDER PAL

                                                       ....... PETITIONER(S)

                                  VERSUS

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIS INSTRUCTIONS (SE) & ORS.

                                                       .... RESPONDENT(S)



CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA



PRESENT: None for the petitioner(s).
         Ms. Charu Tuli, Senior DAG, Punjab.


AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral)

This petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of

India has been filed praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari

quashing order dated 4.4.2008 (Annexure P-7).

The case set up on behalf of the petitioner is that the petitioner

falls in merit and was required to be selected and appointed as Education

Service Provider.

Para-2 of the reply filed on behalf of respondent No.1 states

that the grievance of the petitioner has been redressed. Chairman,
Civil Writ Petition No. 19105 of 2008 2

Departmental Selection Committee, Education Service Providers (DPE

Male), after having examined the claim of the petitioner, has awarded 10

marks, as claimed by the petitioner. The petitioner, accordingly, falls in

the selection zone. The claim of the petitioner has been recommended for

issuance of letter of appointment. Offer of appointment has also been

given by way of letter, placed on record as Annexure R-1.

In view of the stand of respondent No.1, it is disclosed that

the matter has been rendered infructuous.

Disposed of as such.

December 16, 2009                                      ( AJAI LAMBA )
Kang                                                           JUDGE



1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

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