IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.7472 of 2008 Date of Decision: August 30, 2010 Harmanjit Singh & Another .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. D.V. Sharma, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Shivani Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms. Charu Tuli, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. Puneet Jindal, Advocate, for respondent No.3. . . . 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, directing the respondents to strictly follow statutory service rules for further promotions in various cadres in Punjab Electrical Inspectorate Service. 2. In the contention of learned CWP No.7472 of 2008 [2] counsel for the petitioners, executive instructions contained in Memo dated 5.3.1998 have been issued which tend to amend the statutory rules namely Punjab Electrical Inspectorate (State Service Class-II) Rules, 1979. 3. Additional affidavit on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2, sworn on 12.5.2010 has been filed in which Inder Pal Singh, Chief Electrical Inspector, has said in the following terms:- “5) That in compliance to the interim orders dated 4.3.2010 passed by the Hon’ble Court, the matter has been considered and it has been finally decided by the Government at the competent level that no amendment in the existing Punjab Electrical Inspectorate (Group `A’) Service Rules, 2008 shall be carried out as it is not logical and reasonable. In other words, the Government has no intention to further bifurcate the 40% quota meant for promotion of the Line superintendent to the status of Assistant Electrical Inspector amongst the Degree and Diploma holders.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that in view of the statement given on behalf of the respondents, cause of action does not survive. 5. The petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. (AJAI LAMBA) August 30, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?