IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.17830 of 2011 Date of Decision : September 22, 2011. Dilraj Kaur and others .....Petitioners versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Vivek Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms.Sudeepti Sharma, DAG, Punjab. -.- 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? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Ms.Sudeepti Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Let three copies of the writ petition be supplied to the learned State counsel during the course of day failing which the order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-prosecution. In view of the nature of order which I propose to pass, there is no need to seek any counter-reply from the respondents at this stage. C.W.P.No .17830 of 2011 2 The petitioners are working as Guest Faculty Lecturers in respondent No.3-College. They seek a direction that they be not relieved from their assignment with a view to adjust other Guest Faculty (Lecturers) in their place. Ms.Sudeepti Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, states that as a matter of policy and subject to the petitioners' eligibility and availability of work, the Guest Faculty (Lecturers) like the petitioners are not to be substituted by another set of Guest Faculty (Lecturers) and they shall be replaced by regularly appointed employee only. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of as having rendered infructuous. Dasti. September 22, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE