IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.6515 of 2010 Date of Decision : April 08, 2010. Balkar Singh .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Rajnish K.Jindal, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 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? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner applied for the post of PTI in response to the advertisement dated 14.4.2008 (Annexure P-6) issued by the respondents and it is his case that 61 candidates have been selected as per the selection list displayed on the Internet where the name of the petitioner was also figured at Sr.No.53. The petitioner's case is that while other candidates have been given appointment letters, his appointment letter has been with- held without assigning any reason whatsoever. In this regard, the petitioner is said to have represented the authorities through a representation dated 16.2.2010 (Annexure P-9) but the same has not been responded to. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner at some length and keeping in view the nature of relief sought in this writ petition, I deem C.W.P.No .6515 of 2010 2 it appropriate to dispose of the same with a direction to respondent No.2 to take notice of the grievance of the petitioner and redress the same by passing a speaking order, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. April 08, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE