IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No.17829 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION : OCTOBER 01, 2010 HARDHIR SINGH & ANR. ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Ms. Poonam Verma, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent No.2 to take a decision on the complaint filed by the petitioners. 2. It has been brought out that the petitioners earlier approached this Court by way of filing CWP 14375 of 2009 (Hardhir Singh and another v. State of Punjab and others) which was disposed of vide order dated 18.2.2010. Till date, the order has not been complied with. 3. I have considered the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. This Court, while considering the plea of the petitioners, Civil Writ Petition No.17829 of 2010 2 disposed of CWP 14375 of 2009 with directions to respondent No.2 to take a decision, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners, at this stage when the order is being dictated, states that the petitioners would serve respondent No.2 with a notice under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and therefore, let the petition be dismissed as withdrawn. 6. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. October 01, 2010 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?