HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.2766 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 09.09.2011 **** Basant Singh . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab & Ors. . . . . 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. RK Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, DAG Punjab **** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner was selected for the post of Physical Training Instructor in the Ex-serviceman reserved category pursuant to the advertisement dated 29.03.2001. As the petitioner was not offered appointment, he approached this Court in CWP No.8210 of 2002 which was disposed of by a Division Bench vide order dated 05.08.2003 in the following terms:- “In view of the position fairly conceded in the written statement, we consider it just and appropriate to dispose of the instant writ petition by directing the respondents to convene a meeting of the Departmental Selection Committee, so as to conduct CWP No.2766 of 2010.doc - 2 – the petitioner’s interview for appointment to the post of Physical Training Instructor in response to the advertisement dated 29.3.2011 within one month from today. In case the petitioner is found suitable, he shall be appointed within a further period of one month. He shall also be entitled to all consequential benefits other than back wages. It is hereby clarified that the petitioner’s appointment into service will be with effect from the date when others in response to the advertisement dated 29.3.2001 were appointed.” (2). The petitioner was given appointment w.e.f. 31.03.2005 in purported compliance of the above-reproduced directions and was subjected to the new Contributory Pension Scheme. (3). The aggrieved petitioner has again approached this Court seeking retrospective appointment. (4). The respondents in their reply/affidavit have averred that “the petitioner has been given the benefit of notional pay fixation and seniority considering his date of appointment as 5.10.03 in compliance in letter and spirit order dated 5.08.03…….”. The petitioner’s contention is that the candidates lower in merit who were selected along with him have been given appointment w.e.f. 26.11.2001. The said appointment letters are not on record and the CWP No.2766 of 2010.doc - 3 – reply/affidavit filed by the respondents is also silent to that effect. (5). In these circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to verify the above- mentioned claim of the petitioner and in case it is found that any candidate(s) lower in merit has been appointed prior to 05.10.2003, appropriate orders shall be passed in compliance to the order of the Division Bench appointing the petitioner also w.e.f. the same date though with notional pay fixation and seniority, however, without any arrears of pay. In case the respondents find that no such appointment has been made, a speaking order to this effect shall be passed and conveyed to the petitioner. (6). The needful shall be done within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (7). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 09.09.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge