IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.WP No. 7884 of 2010. [O&M] Date of Decision: 6th July, 2011. Naresh Kumar Petitioner through Dr. Balram K. Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vijay Saini, Advocate. Versus State of Punjab & Ors. Respondents through Mr. B.S.Chahal, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Arun Palli, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Tushar Sharma, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 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] The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 28.04.2010 whereby in compliance to the directions issued by the President, Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, the President of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bathinda has ordered termination of the services of the petitioner from the post of Junior Scale Stenographer. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, the State Commission has filed its reply/affidavit. During the course of hearing and on instructions, learned counsel for the respondent Commission, states that the impugned order dated 28.04.2010 may be treated to have been modified to the extent that instead of terminating the services of the petitioner, he shall be allowed to continue as Junior Scale Stenographer on adhoc [89 days] basis as per the original terms and conditions of his appointment till the post is filled up on regular basis by the Competent Authority, in accordance with the Rules. Since the initial appointment of the petitioner as Junior Scale Stenographer was on ad-hoc basis [89 days] as is evident from the appointment letter dated 21.08.2009, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that the petitioner may be allowed to continue on ad-hoc basis till the President of the District Forum, being the Competent Authority, decides to fill up the post on regular basis and grants an opportunity to the petitioner to compete for such regular appointment. Learned counsel for the petitioner rightly submits that the experience of over two years earned by the petitioner while working as Junior Scale Stenographer deserves to be kept in view and he be given due weightage while considering him for appointment on regular basis along with other eligible candidates. Ordered accordingly. The writ petition is disposed of in the afore-stated terms. Dasti. July 06, 2011. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE