IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.16813 of 2010 Date of Decision: September 17, 2010 Gurbachan Lal & Others .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Another .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Anuj Kohli, Advocate, for the petitioners. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus for grant of relief/ benefits in terms of Judgment dated 21.7.2008 rendered by this Court while dealing with Civil Writ Petition No.15554 of 2007 titled `Gian Chand & Others vs. State of Punjab’. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the issue was raised before this Court. A Division Bench of this Court while dealing with the same has quashed Circular dated CWP No.16813 of 2010 [2] 29.7.2003, which is under challenge in this petition also. 3. Notice of motion. 4. Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, on the asking of the Court, accepts notice. Requisite number of copies of the petition have been given to the learned counsel for the respondents in Court. 5. Learned counsel for the parties pray that the matter be disposed of at this stage itself, in view of peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent- State contends that indeed, the issue is covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in Gian Chand’s case (supra). Circular dated 29.7.2003 has been quashed by this Court. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent- State, however, states that the State of Punjab has gone up in appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India against the judgment rendered in Gian Chand’s case (supra), by way of filing of a Special Leave Petition No.25856 of 2008, which is pending. 8. In view of the conceded position that this petition is covered by the judgment rendered by this Court while dealing with Civil Writ CWP No.16813 of 2010 [3] Petition No.15554 of 2007 (Gian Chand & Others vs. State of Punjab), decided on 21.7.2008, this petition is allowed in the same terms. 9. It is, however, made clear that this order shall remain subject to the outcome of the Special Leave Petition pending in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and the petitioners shall be entitled to seek implementation of the judgment through contempt or otherwise only after disposal of the Special Leave Petition. (AJAI LAMBA) September 17, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?