IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.17771 of 2011 Date of Decision : September 21, 2011. Veerpal Kaur .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Kunal Dawar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms.Sudeepti Sharma, DAG, Punjab. -.- 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) Notice of motion. Ms.Sudeepti Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Let three copies of the writ petition be supplied to the learned State counsel during the course of day failing which the order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-prosecution. In view of the nature of the order which I propose to pass, there is no necessity to seek any counter-reply from the respondents at this stage. C.W.P.No .17771 of 2011 2 The petitioner is working as a Guest Faculty Lecturer in respondent No.3-college. She seeks a direction that she be not relieved from her assignment with a view to adjust other Guest Faculty (Lecturer) in his place. Ms.Sudeepti Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, states that as a matter of policy and subject to the petitioner's eligibility and availability of work, the Guest Faculty (Lecturers) like the petitioner are not to be substituted by another set of Guest Faculty (Lecturers) and she shall be replaced by regularly appointed employee only. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of as having rendered infructuous. Dasti. September 21, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE