LPA No. 964 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No. 964 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision 21.12.2010 Sunil Kumar -----Appellant Versus State of Haryana and others ---Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: Mr. Sat Narain Yadav, Advocate for the appellant. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. The instant appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against judgment dated 11.08.2009 rendered by the learned Single Judge holding that the appellant who was one of the selected candidates could not seek appointment to the post of Constable because the selection had already been scrapped. 2. The learned Counsel has, however, drawn our attention to an order passed by a Division Bench in CWP No. 16799 of 2006 and CWP No. 18346 of 2004 decided on 10.01.2008, wherein some directions were issued to the respondent-State. Those directions were not complied with and a COCP No. 643 of 2008 was filed. Thereafter in purported compliance of order, an order dated LPA No. 964 of 2010 (O&M) -2- 07.08.2009 was passed stating that the fate of the candidate would finally be determined after the trial of the criminal case. The appellant before the Division Bench in the aforesaid petition again challenged order dated 07.08.2009 by filing CWP No. 3678 of 2010, which are stated to be admitted. 3. Having regard to the nature of the controversy and the scrapping of selection, we are of the view that at this stage no relief could be granted to the appellant. However, if candidates like Naresh Kumar and Shailender Kumar succeeds, who have filed CWP No. 16799 of 2006 and 18346 of 2004 (supra), then the appellant would be at liberty to file appropriate petition seeking similar relief. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of in the above terms. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (RITU BAHRI) JUDGE December 21, 2010 Atul