IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.O.C.P. No. 1397 of 1997 Date of Decision: July 20, 2011 Shaminder Pal Singh ….Petitioner Versus Smt. Surinder Kaur Kataria and another. … 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 the petitioner had filed Civil Writ Petition No. 8803 of 1997 claiming a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to give appointment as a Clerk/Laboratory Assistant to the petitioner on compassionate ground against vacant post. The writ petition was allowed by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.07.1997, the relevant part of the judgment is as under:- COCP No.1397 of 1997 “Consequently, we dispose off the writ petition by directing the respondents No.1 and 2 to decide the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment within three months of the submission of the certified copy of this order. Appropriate decision shall be taken by the respondents within this period in accordance with the existing instructions and the priority position of the petitioner.” The allegation of the petitioner is that despite the orders of this Court, respondents have failed to decide his application. Respondent No.1, in her reply, has specifically averred that the petitioner applied for the post of Senior Laboratory Attendant on 06.09.1994 for appointment on compassionate grounds and the case of the petitioner was submitted to Administrative Office, Office of the Director of Public Instructions(s) Chandigarh on 24.02.1995, who is the competent and appointment authority. The Director of Administration after checking the case directed the petitioner to send the necessary requisite documents essentially required for appointment on the post of S.L.A., but the petitioner did not submit the complete and original documents instead he submitted the photostat copies of the incomplete documents inspite of the repeated reminder dated 2 COCP No.1397 of 1997 12.8.1996, 6.2.1997 and registered reminder dated 8.9.1997. As a last resort the petitioner was directed through registered letter dated 7.12.1997 by the Director Administration to attend the office of the Circle Education Officer, Faridkot, with complete original documents on 22.12.1997. Respondent No.1 also informed the petitioner accordingly, but the registered letter was received undelivered with the remarks ‘refused to receive” by the postal authorities. Again as a last effort vide registered letter dated 22.1.1998 from Director Administration, the petitioner was asked to come with original documents in office on 27.1.1998, but no reply was received from him. The Administrative Officer vide speaking order dated 23/26.2.1998 rejected the claim of the petitioner due to non-submission of record. Petitioner has not rebutted the contentions made by the respondents. As such, from the facts of the case, no contempt is made out, hence, the present petition is dismissed and notice served on the respondents stands discharged. July 20, 2011 ( Alok Singh ) vkd Judge 3