IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.10231 of 2010 Date of Decision : May 27, 2010. Rano and others .....Petitioners versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Raj Kumar Arya, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.B.S.Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, 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. Mr.B.S.Chahal, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. In view of the nature of the order which I propose to pass, there is no necessity to seek any counter-reply from the respondents at this stage. The petitioners applied for selection to the posts of Teaching Fellows in various categories. It appears that the petitioners' candidatures have been considered in Backward Class Category, but while determining their merit, the experience certificates produced by them have not been C.W.P.No .10231 of 2010 2 found to be genuine after enquiry. The petitioners' grievances are two- folds. Firstly they submit that the experience certificates are genuine and secondly, it is urged that even if the marks for the `experience' are excluded or not awarded to them, still the petitioners make to the selection list. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that the controversy involved in this case has already been settled by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.11111 of 2009 (Parminder Kaur versus State of Punjab and others), decided on 18.3.2010. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and considering the assertions made on their behalf, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction that let the petitioners represent to the authorities alongwith the material in support of their plea that the `experience certificates' relied upon by them are genuine and/or they are otherwise entitled to be given appointments. The said representation(s), if any, shall be considered by respondent No.2 in the light of the above cited decision of this Court in Parminder Kaur's case (supra) , within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. May 27, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE