LPA No.56 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 22.01.2009 LPA No.56 of 2008 Jatinder Pal Singh and others .....Appellants versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents LPA No.57 of 2008 Jasvir Singh and another ...Appellants versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents LPA No.58 of 2008 Hakam Singh ....Appellant Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents LPA No.59 of 2008 Parvinder Singh and another ...Appellants Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents LPA No.61 of 2008 Deepak Jindal and others ....Appellants Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents LPA No.103 of 2008 Jatinder Singh and others ....Appellants Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents LPA No.56 of 2008 2 LPA No.131 of 2008 Gurjant Singh and another ....Appellants Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents LPA No.132 of 2008 Sukhdev Singh and others ....Appellants Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents LPA No.250 of 2008 Ram Singh ....Appellant Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE UMA NATH SINGH. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL. Present : Mr.Vikram Bali, Advocate, Mr.R.D. Sharma, Advocate and Mr.Parminder P.Sharma, Advocate, for appellants. Ms.Simsi Dhir, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. -.- UMA NATH SINGH, J. Learned counsel for appellants submitted that in the instant LPAs, cases of appellants (who are physically handicapped) have been rejected not on a serious ground like charges of corruption, dishonesty or irregularity, but on account of procedural defects. Learned counsel prayed for permission to withdraw these appeals as also the writ petitions with liberty to approach the Government afresh to explain the procedural defects and for a fresh consideration. LPA No.56 of 2008 3 Learned State Counsel, on instructions from Mr.Mewa Singh, Under Secretary, Rural Development Department, Punjab and Mr.Baljeet Singh, Senior Assistant, RDE-5 Branch, who are present in Court, stated that the State Government would have no objection if such representations are submitted for a fresh consideration with proper explanation. Thus, in terms of prayer, the writ petitions as well as LPAs are permitted to be withdrawn. Resultantly, the impugned judgment would have no effect on the rights of appellants. If such representations are made, as prayed for, the same shall be decided on merits within 3 months. We would like to make it clear that these appeals and writ petitions in so far as they relate to such appellants who have been granted relief vide the order dated 22.5.2008, are also rendered infructuous and disposed of. All the aforesaid LPAs thus stand disposed of. (UMA NATH SINGH) JUDGE 22-01-2009 (A.N.JINDAL) Mohinder JUDGE