HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.11369 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 13.09.2011 **** Neelam . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab & Anr. . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 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? **** Present: Ms. Maninder, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, DAG Punjab **** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The original application form of the petitioner pursuant to the order dated 11.07.2011 has been produced wherein she (the petitioner) has categorically mentioned her experience as “SST, Hindi Teacher”. However, the experience certificate dated 19.03.2007 produced by the petitioner talks of her experience w.e.f. 01.03.2002 to 15.03.2007 “as a JBT Post”. The other certificate relied upon by the petitioner of the even date also shows that she worked against the JBT post. The so-called experience of the petitioner thus is contrary to what she has disclosed in the application form. CWP No.11369 of 2009.doc - 2 – (2). That being so, no fault can be found with the impugned order. (3). Dismissed. 13.09.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge 2