IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 11144 of 2005 DATE OF DECISION: August 28, 2009 Ashok Kumar and Another .........PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab and Others ......RESPONDENT(S) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA Present: Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms. Charu Tuli, Sr. DAG, Punjab. AJAI LAMBA, J. (ORAL) This civil writ petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to issue appointment letters to the petitioners on regular basis for the post of Dispenser in the Department of Homeopathic. Selection process was conducted by Subordinate Services Selection Board whereupon the names of the petitioners were recommended for appointment on 26.12.2001. Police verification was also done. Orders of appointment, however, were not issued. Representation was made for issuance of order of appointment. Learned counsel for the respondent-State states that posts had been abolished. Subsequently, however, certain developments have taken C.W.P. No. 11144 of 2005 -2- place. Vide memo no. 4H.Pb.2009/1291 dated 26.02.2009, Commissioner AYUSH-cum-Head of Homeopathic Deptt., Punjab has addressed a letter to the Advocate General, Punjab in the context of cases pending in this Court including the present writ petition. It has been conveyed to the Advocate General's Office that on revival of the posts with consent of Finance Department, appointment letters can be issued. There are 10 posts of Homeopathic Dispensers in the department. Communication dated 26.02.2009 is taken on record. Learned counsel for the respondent further points out that another communication dated 27.08.2009 has been received which indicates that indeed the posts have been revived. Learned counsel, in view of letters dated 26.02.2009 and 27.08.2009, states that the case of the petitioners for appointment shall be considered within a period of three months of receipt of certified copy of the order. In view of the statement of learned counsel for the respondents and the facts as they emerge from letters dated 26.02.2009 and 27.08.2009, this petition is disposed of as having become infructuous as no cause of action survives. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners would be entitled to appointment from the date when persons junior to the petitioners in selection process had been appointed. The petitioners would be at liberty to file a representation in regard to their rights, a decision whereupon would also be taken by the respondents in accordance with law C.W.P. No. 11144 of 2005 -3- and in particular the cited judgment namely CWP No. 11439 of 2003 titled Rajvir Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Others Annexure P-1. 28.08.2009 (AJAI LAMBA) shivani JUDGE 1. To be referred to the reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?