IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 18352 of 2010 Date of Decision: December 5, 2011 Didar Singh …Petitioner Versus Union of India and others …Respondents CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: HON'BLE HON'BLE HON'BLE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. HON’BLE MR. HON’BLE MR. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JUSTICE JUSTICE JUSTICE RAJIV NA RAJIV NA RAJIV NA RAJIV NARAIN RAINA RAIN RAINA RAIN RAINA RAIN RAINA Present: Mr. Sanjay Kaushal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Onkar Singh Batalvi, Central Govt. Standing Counsel, for respondent No. 1. Mr. Suvir Sehgal, Addl. AG, Punjab, for respondent Nos. 2 to 4. Mr. Johny Goyal, Advocate, for Mr. H.S. Brar, Advocate, for respondent No. 5. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. M.M. M.M. M.M. KUMAR, J. KUMAR, J. KUMAR, J. KUMAR, J. Mr. Sanjay Kaushal, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has instructions not to press the instant petition at this stage because adequate measures are being taken by the respondents. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed. (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE (RAJIV NARAIN RAINA RAJIV NARAIN RAINA RAJIV NARAIN RAINA RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) December 5 December 5 December 5 December 5, 2011 , 2011 , 2011 , 2011 JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE Pkapoor