IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.O.C.P. No. 963 of 1995 Date of Decision: July 18, 2011 H.U.D.A. Technocrats Association ….Petitioner Versus Sh. R.S. Gujral. … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH 1. Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: None. Alok Singh, J. (Oral) I have gone through the record. The brief facts of the present case are that petitioner-Association filed a Civil Writ Petition No. 3056 of 1991 challenging the decision of the respondents, appointing Executive Engineers on deputation instead of promoting the HUDA Engineers. This writ petition was finally disposed of vide order dated 18.05.1992 when the counsel for the respondent made a statement in the Court that the persons from the Department would be considered for promotion in accordance with law as and when the post become available. COCP No.963 of 1995 The allegation of the petitioner is that the respondent is filling up the post of Executive Engineer taking the persons on deputation. In reply, respondent has averred that the order dated 18.05.1992 was subsequently clarified by the Court vide order dated 03.09.1993 that the respondents may consider the names of the persons of the Department as far as possible before the vacancies are filled by other modes. He has further averred that respondent is complying with the order of this Court with full spirit as “in the year 1995, the number of the posts has risen to 23 while the number of officers on deputation has come down to 7. This submission is made with a view to show that primarily, it is the interest of the organization which has to be seen. In this respect, persons on deputation from the Public Health as well as the Buildings and Roads Department of the State are taken on deputation to augment the expertise required for execution and implementation of the complex projects. Persons from these departments have far greater experience and knowledge as compared to officers of H.U.D.A. who form a relatively fresh team……….. that H.U.D.A. officers are considered before appointment of officers on deputation. Even in the present case, while taking a decision to fill up the newly created posts of Executive Engineer, as per the record, specific reference was made to the order passed by this 2 COCP No.963 of 1995 Hon’ble Court in CWP No. 3056 of 1991 and the Chief Engineer asked to consider H.U.D.A. employees before any post was made. After due consideration of the requirements of the organization, it was recommended that one officer be taken from the Department of Public Health on deputation while the remaining two posts be filled by officers from within H.U.D.A. This was in keeping the overall interests of the organization in mind and the fact that out of the four posts created, three had been filled by H.U.D.A. employees.” From the perusal of the reply of respondent No.1, it reveals that respondent is complying with the orders of this Court, hence, no contempt of court under Section 12 of the Courts Act is made out and therefore, the present petition is dismissed. July 18, 2011 ( Alok Singh ) vkd Judge 3