IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.O.C.P. No.266 of 2007 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 29.1.2008 Jarnail Singh & ors. ....Petitioner(s) through Mr.K.L.Arora, Advocate vs. K.R.Lakhanpal IAS & ors. ....Respondent(s) through Mr.S.S.Sahu, AAG, Punjab. *** CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. *** 1) Whether Reporters of the 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? *** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) This order shall dispose of C.O.C.P.Nos.266 of 2007 and 227 of 2006. The contempt petitions have been filed by Chief Reporters/Reporters working in Punjab Vidhan Sabha alleging, inter alia, that appointments/promotions on the establishment of the Vidhan Sabha, especially those pertaining to their cadre, are being made on the whims and fancies and are contrary to the stand consistently taken before this Court in various rounds of litigation. Based upon those draft service Rules which are stated to have been approved by the Speaker for the purpose of recruitment to various posts in the Vidhan Sabha, a categoric stand was taken before this Court in C.O.C.P.No.607 of 1994 in C.W.P.No.13208 of 1990 that two posts of Reporters were upgraded to that of Chief Reporters (II) so as to provide C.O.C.P. No.266 of 2007 (O&M) -2- promotional avenues to the Reporters, followed by yet another higher post of Editor of Debates against which a Chief Reporter, on satisfactory completion of probation of one year, “would be considered for promotion”. The above-quoted stand taken before this Court, however, is stated to have not been adhered to as one Amrit Pal, a Superintendent Grade (I) (not the Chief Reporter) was promoted as Editor of Debates vide office order No.27 of 2003 issued on 1.4.2003. In response to the show cause notice, learned State counsel has now placed on record copy of the notification dated 15.2.2007 whereby “The Punjab Vidhan Sabha Secretariat Service Rules, 2007” have been notified. These Rules have been framed and notified by the Speaker, Punjab Vidhan Sabha after getting the same duly approved by the House and in exercise of his powers under Article 187(2) of the Constitution of India. The aforementioned notification is taken on record. Learned counsel for the petitioners, however, vehemently contends that these Rules could not have been notified unless approved by the State Government. According to him, the draft Rules were sent to the State Government, however, even without awaiting for its approval, the same have been notified with a view to adversely affect the promotional avenues of the petitioners. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the fact that the service Rules have since been notified, there appears to be no reason to continue with these contempt proceedings which are accordingly disposed of, however, with liberty to the petitioners to impugn C.O.C.P. No.266 of 2007 (O&M) -3- the above-stated Rules before an appropriate forum, if so required or advised. Rule discharged. Let a copy of this order be given Dasti to learned State counsel for information and necessary compliance. January 29, 2008 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE