In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh C.W.P. No. 367 of 2001 Date of Decision: September 25, 2006 Moti Ram and others …Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI PRESENT: None for the petitioners. JUDGMENT M.M. KUMAR, J (Oral) On 10.1.2001, a Division Bench of this Court has rejected the application for exemption from filing the Court fee and adjourned the case sine die to be listed as and when deficiency in Court fee was make good. The counsel for the petitioners was not present even on that date. The situation continuous to be the same. Therefore, we refuse to entertain the petition on behalf of all the petitioners except petitioner No. 1. The prayer made by the petitioner in the instant petition is to regularise his services in terms of the policy instructions of the State (P-1 to P-3 respectively). No such direction could be issued in view of Constitution CWP No. 367 of 2001 Bench judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka & others v. Umadevi & others, (2006) 4 SCC 1 as well as well as detailed judgment of this Court in the case of Rajinder Kumar v. State of Haryana, 2006 (2) PLR 474. Therefore, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed even on behalf of petitioner No. 1. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (M.M.S. BEDI) September 25, 2006 JUDGE Pkapoor 2