LPA No. 322 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. LPA No. 322 of 2011 Date of decision 23 .2.2011 Ram Mehar Narwal ... Appellant Versus Managing Direcotr, UHBVN Ltd. And others ... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S.MANN Present: Mr. Shalinder Singh, Advocate for the appellant 1.To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 2.Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. The instant appeal filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against judgement dated 5.1.2011 rendered by the learned Single Judge holding that the appellant had challenged the adverse remarks recorded in his confidential report by filing a civil suit which has been dismissed and the same relief has been sought in the instant proceedings. Even the first appeal by the learned Addl. District Judge was dismissed on 31.7.2007. Therefore, the learned Single Judge has held that no petition would be maintainable against the adverse remarks which he had earlier challenged by filing a civil suit. The appellant had retired from service and he has challenged the adverse remarks after a lapse of about 15 years. The judgement and decree passed in the civil suit and as upheld by the learned Addl. District Judge in appeal would certainly be a bar against the appellant to raise the same issue by filing another petition. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant, we find that LPA No. 322 of 2011 2 it is a frivolous piece of litigation. No new proceedings could be initiated once the proceedings in the suit had attained finality. The judgement of the learned Single Judge does not suffer from any legal infirmity warranting admission of the appeal. Dismissed. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (T.P.S.Mann ) 23 .2.2011 Judge okg.