IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.O.C.P. No.218 of 2008 Date of Decision:- 29.04.2008 Ajay Kumar @ Jyoti & anr. ....Petitioner(s) through Mr.Suram Singh Rana, Advocate vs. Sh.B.C.Gupta etc. ....Respondent(s) through Mr.N.S.Pawar, Addl.AG, 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) Crl.Misc.No.67073-M of 2006 filed by the petitioners was allowed by this Court vide order dated August 13, 2007 to the extent that the order rejecting his claim for pre-mature release was set aside and the respondents were directed to reconsider the petitioners' case in the light of their Policy dated 8.7.1991 and pass an appropriate order within a period of two months .........” On the asking of the Court, learned State Counsel has filed reply/affidavit of first and second respondents which is taken on record. The first respondent has averred in his reply/affidavit that the claim of the petitioners has been reconsidered in terms of the orders passed by this Court and has again been turned down vide order dated 22.4.2008 (Annexures R-1 and R-2). In these circumstances, when the respondents have apparently C.O.C.P. No.218 of 2008 -2- reconsider the petitioners' cases as per the Government instructions dated 8.7.1991, I do not deem it necessary to continue with these proceedings which are accordingly disposed of, however, with liberty to the petitioners to impugn the above-stated orders Annexures R-1 and R-2 before an appropriate forum, if so advised. April 29, 2008 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE