IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No. 20242 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION : NOVEMBER 9, 2009 MANJULA SOOD ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. BS Chahal, DAG, Punjab. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) It has been pleaded in the petition that vide advertisement (Annexure P-1), various vacancies for the posts of Teaching Fellows (JBT/ETT) were advertised district-wise. The petitioner applied for the post of ETT under sports quota category. 3 posts were to be filled up from District Kapurthala from sports category. The petitioner has a 'C' Grade Sports Certificate, issued under the rules by the Director of Sports, Punjab. The gist of the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is Civil Writ Petition No. 20242 of 2008 2 that under the advertisement (Annexure P-1), it has been provided that “Only A grade and B grade Certificate holder will be considered”. Learned counsel for the respondent-State contends that an error occurred in the advertisement (Annexure P-1). Indeed, 'C' and 'D' Grade Certificate holders are also required to be considered. The posts are not being filled up out of sports quota in response to the advertisement (Annexure P-1). Learned counsel for the respondent-State states that a fresh advertisement would be issued while inviting 'A', 'B', 'C' and 'D' Grade Certificate holders for competing, for selection. Learned counsel for the respondent-State further states that the matter is pending adjudication before a Division Bench. On finalisation of the matter, the needful will be done. In view of the stand taken by the respondents, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the matter has been rendered infrutuous. Disposed of as infructuous. November 9, 2009 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?