IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.2078 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: October 22, 2009. Dr. Shardev Singh Gill ...Petitioner(s) v. Jaspal Singh & Anr. ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present: Shri BPS Virk, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri P.S. Thiara, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the respondents. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral): The respondent No.1 is present in Court. As per the averments made in this petition, the petitioner who was an employee of Guru Nanak Khalsa College, Abohar was not paid his salary, therefore, he made a representation to the DPI (Colleges), Punjab for directing the management of the aforesaid college to release the aforesaid payment. It is the further case of the petitioner that since his aforesaid representation was not decided, he filed CWP No.3451 of 2008 for redressal of his grievance and this Court vide judgment dated 10.3.2008 directed the DPI (Colleges), Punjab to decide his representation. The grievance of the petitioner in this contempt petition is that despite the aforesaid direction, the respondents have failed to take any action on his representation. In response to the show cause notice issued by this Court, reply by way of affidavit of Sohan Lal, DPI (Colleges), Punjab has been filed wherein it has been submitted that Guru Nanak Khalsa College, Abohar is an unaided college and the State of Punjab is not liable to make any payment to the said college and the payment of salary and allowances etc. is the responsibility of the college management only. It was further submitted in the reply that the management of the aforesaid college vide memo dated 20.10.2009 (attached as Annexure R-1) has been directed to make the payment of due salary and DA etc. to the petitioner and report compliance to their office after making the payment. Faced with this situation, that the payment of due salary of the petitioner is to be made by the management of the college, learned counsel for the petitioner wishes to withdraw the present contempt petition with liberty to the petitioner to seek any other remedy against the aforesaid management, in accordance with law. With aforesaid liberty, this petition is ordered to be dismissed as withdrawn. Rule discharged. October 22, 2009. [ Rakesh Kumar Garg ] kadyan Judge