IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.4977 of 1988 (O&M) Date of decision : 9.11.2010 Om Parkash Sharma and others … Petitioners Versus The Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Punjab, Chandigarh and another …Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr.Justice M.M.Kumar Hon’ble Ms.Justice Ritu Bahri Present: Mr.Amit Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.APS Mann, Advocate for respondent No.2.. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M.Kumar, J. The primary grievance made by the petitioners in this petition was that the Registrar was not granting approval for the increase of number of posts of Senior Assistant (Selection grade) from 20% to 50% of the cadre strength as on 1.1.1978 in accordance with the decision taken by the Punjab Government on 5.6.1980 (Annexure P-1) and also the decision of the Board of Directors dated 31.10.1986 (Annexure P-6). The petitioners have also sought direction that their designation of Senior Assistant may not be changed to that of Assistant. Mr.D.S.Rana, Superintendent, who is one of the petitioners has filed an affidavit conceding that regarding the first relief, approval to convert 50% of the posts of Senior Assistant as on 1.1.1978 in Selection Grade has now been accorded on 26.4.1994 (Annexure P-8). Accordingly, the grievance of the petitioners has been substantially redressed. However, the other grievance namely remaining 50% may not be designated as Assistant/Senior Scale Stenographer (Grade-II), has not met with success because some CWP No.4977 of 1988 (O&M) difference has been made in the nomenclature in respect of those who are not Selection grade Assistant and one who are selection grade Assistant. Mr.Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the implementation of the decision is not in accordance with the law and instructions governing the issue. He has drawn our attention to the order dated 20.9.1994 (Annexure P-10) showing that selection grade would be converted on the basis of seniority alone. However, that is not within the scope of the present writ petition and these are subsequent developments which would provide a fresh cause of action. Accordingly, the writ petition with regard to the relief claimed, has been rendered infructuous and is disposed of as such. However, the petitioners shall be at liberty to challenge the implementation part or any other subsequent order as it provides a fresh cause of action. Petition stands disposed of. (M.M.Kumar ) Judge (Ritu Bahri) Judge 9.11.2010 sd 2