C.W.P.No.2134 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.2134 of 2008 Date of Decision : 13.02.2008 Yash Pal .....Petitioner versus The Haryana State Federation of Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd., Panchkula and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL Present : Shri Nand Lal Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? JUDGMENT HEMANT GUPTA, J. In the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 27.7.2007, Annexure P-8 vide which the claim of the petitioner for appointment as regular/permanent Cane Kamdar, has been rejected by the respondents. After the death of father of the petitioner, namely Udey Singh who was working as Cane Clerk Grade-IV with the respondent-Sugar Mill, on 7.3.2000, the petitioner was appointed on the post of Unskilled Mazdoor (Seasonal) on 6.12.2000. The petitioner has been confirmed on the said post w.e.f. 7.12.2001. Thereafter, the petitioner claimed appointed against the post of Cane Kamdar (Regular). C.W.P.No.2134 of 2008 2 In pursuance of the directions of this Court in earlier Civil Writ Petition filed by the petitioner, the claim of the petitioner against the said post has been considered and declined by respondent No.2 on 28.7.2007. It has been found that the petitioner has accepted all the terms and conditions and submitted the duplicated copy of the appointment letter to the Management in token of acceptance of its terms and conditions when he was appointed as Unskilled Mazdoor (Sessional) on 6.12.2000. It has been further pointed out that seniority list of the Unskilled Mazdoor (Sessional) has been approved by the Board of Directors, wherein the name of petitioner stands at Serial No.26. Once the petitioner has accepted the terms and conditions of the appointment as Unskilled Mazdoor (Sessional) on compassionate ground, the petitioner cannot claim a different status then to what has been accepted by him. In view of the above, we do not find any illegality or irregularity in the order dated 28.7.2007, Annexure P-8, which may warrant interference of this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction. The writ petition stands dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE 13-02-2008 (MOHINDER PAL) *mohinder JUDGE