IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA 356 of 2009 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: May 18, 2009 Haryana Tourism Corporation Ltd. …Appellant Versus Ramesh Chander and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. BHALLA Present: Mr. Sushil Jain, Advocate, for the appellant. 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? M.M. KUMAR, J. This order shall dispose of LPA Nos. 356 to 361 of 2009, which have been filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent challenging identical orders dated 2.2.2009, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in C.O.C.P. Nos. 1244, 1246, 1249, 1245, 1247 and 1248 of 1999. The learned Single Judge has issued direction to the appellant-Corporation to consider cases of the petitioners-respondents by keeping in view the judgment of this Court already rendered in various cases, of which reference has been made LPA No. 356 of 2009 (O&M) in the order dated 2.2.2009 (P-4 to P-8). Before the learned Single Judge, it appears to have been conceded that a number of other persons, who were petitioners in the main writ petition i.e. C.W.P. No. 16365 of 1998, stood absorbed in service in view of the fact that the vacancies had become available. Some of those writ petitioners who had not been absorbed, have made the grievance and the learned Single Judge has issued direction for their consideration. There is no offending direction. The matter has been left to be considered at the hands of the appellant-Corporation. We find no ground to interfere in the impugned orders. Dismissed. In view of dismissal of the appeals on merit, we do not feel any necessity to pass any orders in the miscellaneous applications filed alongwith the appeals. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (H.S. BHALLA) May 18, 2009 JUDGE Pkapoor 2