IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.807 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: December 3, 2009. R.P. Sabharwal & Ors. ...Petitioner(s) v. Ms. Anjali Bhawara & Ors. ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present: Shri Puneet Jindal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Shri M.C. Berry, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for respondents No.1 & 2. Shri Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate, for respondents No.3 & 4. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral): Respondents No.3 and 4 are present in court. An affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents No.3 & 4, wherein it has been submitted as under:- “That in compliance to directions dated 6.10.2009 passed by this Hon'ble Court, the due claim of remaining nine petitioners has been released to them by the college from their own funds. In this regard, the Govt. has not paid any sum towards grant in aid qua these nine petitioners in question, in which regard the claim has been submitted to the DPI (Colleges) by hand vide letter dated 30.11.2009, copy of which is attached. Thus in due compliance of directions in main writ petition as well as undertaking by way of affidavit of Sh. Sohan Lal, DPI dated 6.10.2009, the Govt. be directed to release the above said amount claim by the answering respondent.” However, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the aforesaid stand taken by respondents No.3 and 4 is not correct as in the affidavit dated 11.12.2008 filed on behalf of respondent No.1, it is mentioned that an amount of Rs.2,65,37,000.18, as claimed by the management was released to them on 1.12.2008, which includes the payment relating to the petitioners. Shri M.C. Berry, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, appearing on behalf of the respondents No.1 & 2, has also pointed out that another sum of Rs.19,73,068/- was also released to respondents No.3 and 4 and thereafter no admitted claim of the respondent-management was pending with respondent authorities at the time of filing of the aforesaid affidavit. Even otherwise, from the perusal of the affidavit dated 3.12.2009 filed by Shri S.M. Sharma, Principal, Arya College, Ludhiana, it is crystal clear that the management has submitted its claim with regard to nine petitioners, only on 30.11.2009 to the respondent-Govt. Be that as it may, whether the aforesaid claim is payable by the Govt. to the respondent-management is a separate question and can be dealt with only when any cause of action arises between the parties. Without going into the controversy further and keeping in view the fact that the dues of the petitioners have been paid, I am not inclined to proceed further against the respondents. Disposed of. Rule discharged. December 3, 2009. [ Rakesh Kumar Garg ] kadyan Judge