HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.8476 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 21.07.2011 **** Vijay Dhawan & Ors. . . . . Petitioners VS. State of Punjab & Anr. . . . . Respondents **** 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? **** Present: Mr. Somesh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners Ms. Charu Tuli, Sr. DAG Punjab Mr. Anupam Singla, Advocate for respondent No.2 ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioners seek a mandamus for their appointment as ETT teachers under the Sarv Shiksha Abhiyan Authority in the State of Punjab. (2). It is not in dispute that the last date to submit the applications was 25.8.2008. The petitioners also applied in response to the advertisement even when their result of ETT Course was not declared till the last date to apply. Their result was, however, declared on 11.12.2008 though the petitioners meanwhile appeared for the counseling also on 26.11.2008. It is not in dispute that two candidates whose result was also still awaited appeared CWP No.8476 of 2009.doc - 2 – for counseling along with the petitioners and were given appointment even in the absence of a formal ETT certificate. But the petitioners were denied appointment though subsequently their result was declared. The petitioners seek a direction for their appointment on the plea that the similarly-placed candidates have already been given appointment. (3). In order to counter the plea of discrimination taken by the petitioners, the respondents terminated the services of two candidates whose result was not declared at the time of their appointment as ETT teachers. Those two candidates approached this Court and their writ petition is said to have been allowed and they were ordered to be re-instated. Resultantly, those two candidates are now working on contractual basis. (4). It would be nothing but discriminatory to deny similar treatment to the petitioners. (5). Consequently, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to appoint the petitioners as ETT teachers on contract basis till the expiry of current term and/or the renewal thereof, from time to time. (6). The needful shall be done within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (7). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. CWP No.8476 of 2009.doc - 3 – 21.07.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge