RSA No. 1195 of 2009 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No. 1195 of 2009 Date of Decision: 10.9.2009 Ravinder Singh ......Appellant Versus Gurkul Kurukshetra and another .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA. 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? Present: Shri Anil Ghanghas, Advocate, for the appellant. Shri Aman Pal, Advocate, for respondent No.2. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral). The plaintiff is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, whereby the suit challenging the order of termination dated 5.11.2003 passed by the defendants, was dismissed. The suit filed by the appellant has been dismissed relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Executive Committee of Vaish Degree College Shamli and other v. Lakshmi Narain and others, AIR 1976 Supreme Court 888, wherein it has been held that such suit is not maintainable as the only remedy in such like RSA No. 1195 of 2009 (2) cases is for damages. Admittedly, the defendants are not the State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, in case of termination of service of the plaintiff, the only remedy of an employee is to sue for damages as contract for personal service cannot be specifically enforced. In view of the judgment in Executive Committee of Vaish Degree College Shamli [supra], I do not find any patent illegality or material irregularity in the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, which may give rise to any substantial question of law in the present appeal. Hence, the present appeal is dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE 10.9.2009 ds