IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 15347 of 2002 (O&M) Date of Decision: November 17, 2010 Bhupinder Singh Bedi and others ...Petitioners Versus Punjab State Electricity Board and others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: Mr. Pankaj Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Sukhbir Singh Mattewal, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Mr. Rajiv Atma Ram, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Arjun Pratap Atma Ram, Advocate, Mr. H.S. Saggu, Advocate, for the added respondents. 1. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. The petitioners who are Lineman in the Punjab State Electricity Board (for brevity, ‘the Board’) have approached this Court with a prayer for quashing office order dated 12.7.2002/30.7.2002 (P-3). It has also been prayed that the Punjab State Electricity Board Technical Services Class-III Regulations, 1996 (for brevity, ‘the Regulations’), framed by the Board under Section 79(c) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, be declared as void and ultra vires the Constitution as the Regulations have not been published in the official gazette by issuing notification. A further prayer for restraining the CWP No. 15347 of 2002 (O&M) official respondents from filling up the posts of Junior Engineer by way of direct recruitment or promotional quota from the employees of non-diploma holders has also been sought. 2. The writ petition was admitted on 23.1.2003. On 8.4.2005 this Court had issued directions to the effect that the respondent Board was not to fill up any post beyond the posts already advertised and all the appointments made during the pendency of the petition were to abide the final decision of this petition. The respondent Board could not fill up any post even from the wait list candidates who are added respondents in the instant petition. They filed C.M. No. 10112 of 2005. On the aforesaid application, an order was passed on 16.12.2005. It was noticed by this Court that the wait list was prepared by the Board, which was valid up to 31.12.2005 and the list was to lapse on the aforesaid date, which would have adversely affected the interest of the added respondents. Keeping in view the aforesaid factual position, this Court had passed an order that the wait list which has been prepared by the Board would continue to be valid and shall not lapse till the disposal of the petition. 3. Mr. Pankaj Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners states that during the pendency of the instant petition, the Regulations have been amended and a fresh advertisement has also been issued to fill up the posts. Accordingly, he has submitted that the petitioners do not wish to press the instant petition. 4. Mr. Rajiv Atma Ram, learned senior counsel for the added respondents, however, has pointed out that order dated 16.12.2005 passed by this Court may not be permitted to become infructuous with the withdrawal of the petition and the select/wait list would be deemed to be alive. 5. Mr. Sukhbir Singh Mattewal, learned counsel for the Board has, 2 CWP No. 15347 of 2002 (O&M) however, pointed out that during the pendency of the instant petition, the Board has been bifurcated into two parts viz. the Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and the Punjab State Transmission Corporation Limited. 6. Keeping in view the aforesaid factual position, the writ petition is permitted to be withdrawn. The withdrawal of this petition shall not put any embargo on the rights of the petitioners to move this Court for any fresh cause of action. However, the order dated 16.12.2005 protecting the rights of the added respondents shall remain alive and the select/wait list, which was otherwise valid up to 31.12.2005 shall continue to be valid for another period of four months. On account of the stay order passed by this Court the Board did not take any step to fill up the post from wait/select list. The Board may, if so advised, pass final order within the period for which the select/wait list has been ordered to remain alive. Such a direction has been issued because on 27.10.2005 the Board has represented before this Court that a panel of wait list has been prepared and the Board was interested to fill up the vacant post from the wait list subject to permission of the Court. Thereafter order was passed on 16.12.2005. If no decision is taken within the period of four months then appropriate application may be filed by the added respondents. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (RITU BAHRI) November 17, 2010 JUDGE Pkapoor 3