IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.13537 of 1993 Date of Decision : February 04, 2011. Vinod Kumar .....Petitioner versus The State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Ramesh Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms.Monica Chhibbar 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) The petitioner is aggrieved by the seniority list dated 17.6.1992 (Annexure P-7) in which his name has not been included amongst the Clerks. He is also aggrieved by the order dated 3rd September, 1993 (Annexure P-12) treating him as a Bill Distributor instead of a Clerk. The petitioner's grievance is that he is entitled to be included in the cadre of Clerks and not the Bill Distributors as per the Resolution No.31 dated 12.3.1991 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Municipal Committee, Bhucho Mandi. The above stated change in the nomenclature of cadre appears to have been effected pursuant to an order dated 14/23.8.1991 (Annexure P-6) which has since been quashed by this Court in Balkar Singh and C.W.P.No .13537 of 1993 2 another versus State of Punjab and others, 1995 (8) SLR 543. It may be mentioned here that while admitting the writ petition, the respondents were directed to pay the petitioner the same salary which he was getting before passing of the impugned order, namely, as a Clerk. That being so, the writ petition is allowed; the impugned orders are hereby quashed and the respondents are directed to treat the petitioner as a Clerk for all intents and purposes. Dasti. February 04, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE