Crl. Misc. No.3264 of 2008 in Crl. Misc. No.44438-M of 2007 Present: Shri Rakesh Kaushik, Advocate, for the applicant. Notice to the Advocate General, Punjab. Shri G.S. Cheema, learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice. He fairly concedes that due to typographical error only that the word “petitioner No.1” instead of “petitioner No.2” has been typed in the first line in the last paragraph of the order dated 20.9.2007. In view of the fact that the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail qua petitioner No.1 was expressly dismissed vide the first paragraph of the aforementioned order, the Registry is directed to carry out necessary correction in the last paragraph of the order dated 20.9.2007 so that the expression “petitioner No.1” is read as “petitioner No.2”. Ordered accordingly. Application stands disposed of. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.925 of 2007 Present: Shri Sudeep Mahajan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Nirmaljit Kaur, Assistant Solicitor General of India, for respondent No.1. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for respondents No.2 and 4. Learned Counsel for respondent No.1 seeks some more time to inform as to whether or not necessary payments have been released in favour of the petitioner. As a last opportunity, adjourned to 10.3.2008. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.939 of 2007 Present: Shri Sudeep Mahajan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Nirmaljit Kaur, Assistant Solicitor General of India, for respondent No.1. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for respondents No.2 and 4. Learned Counsel for respondent No.1 seeks some more time to inform as to whether or not necessary payments have been released in favour of the petitioner. As a last opportunity, adjourned to 10.3.2008. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.1595 of 2007 Present: Shri J.S. Bhatia, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri S.K. Sharma, Advocate, for the respondent. Learned Counsel for the respondent seeks some more time to have instructions as to whether or not the appeal has been decided. In the interest of justice, and as a last opportunity, adjourned to 25.3.2008. It is made clear that in case the appeal is not decided and an order to that effect is not communicated to the petitioner before the adjourned date, the respondent shall remain present in Court. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.1681 of 2007 Present: Shri ADS Jattana, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Shri Rupinder Khosla, Advocate The reply – affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents in court, is taken on record. Perused the same. There is hardly any justification for not concluding the ongoing investigation despite the fact that directions to this effect were issued by this Court way back on 25.4.2006. However, as prayed for by Learned Counsel for the respondents, adjourned to 20.3.2008. Meanwhile, it is directed that the investigation be completed failing which both the respondents shall remain present in Court. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Miscellaneous No.1295 of 2008 in CWP No.377 of 1985 Present: Shri Alok Jain, Advocate, for the applicant-petitioner. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. As prayed for, the writ petition qua petitioners No.3 and 4 qua the land, the details of which are given in para 4 of the application, is dismissed as having become infructuous. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Miscellaneous No.1310 of 2008 in CWP No.8452 of 1987 Present: Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Notice to the Advocate General, Punjab. Shri G.S. Cheema, learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice. As prayed for by him, adjourned to 18.3.2008 for filing reply. Meanwhile, no recovery shall be effected from the petitioner. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.130 of 2008 Present: Shri Jasjit Singh Bedi, Advocate, for the petitioners. Let three copies of this petition be handed over to Shri R.S. Kundu, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, during course of the day, who shall have instructions in the matter on the adjourned date. Adjourned to 4.3.2008. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.131 of 2008 Present: Shri Jagdish Manchanda, Advocate, for the petitioner. Let two copies of this petition be handed over to Shri R.S. Kundu, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, during course of the day, who shall have instructions in the matter on the adjourned date. Adjourned to 3.4.2008. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.132 of 2008 Present: Shri R.S. Manhas, Advocate, for the petitioner. Let two copies of this petition be handed over to Shri G.S. Cheema, learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, during course of the day, who shall have instructions in the matter on the adjourned date. Adjourned to3.4.2008. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No.502 of 2008 Present: Shri Lalit Garg, Advocate, for the petitioner. This Revision Petition is directed agaionst the order dated 11.12.2007 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Nabha. Vide the aforementioned order, the respondent – defendant has been permitted to furnish the indemnity bonds. The petitioner – plaintiff has filed a suit for recovery of Rs.46,380/-, which includes Rs.30,000/- as principal amount. The aforesaid civil suit is based upon a promissory note. On 10.9.2007, the defendant put in appearance and sought leave to defend. The same was conditionally granted, “subject to furnishing indemnity bond by the defendant in the sum of Rs.40,000/- till the next date of hearing”. On the next date of hearing, i.e., 10.10.2007, the learned Civil court passed the following order:- “Written statement filed today. Indemnity bonds not furnished. In view of the statement suffered by ld. Counsel for defendant, case is adjourned to 11.12.2007 for furnishing indemnity bonds.” Concededly, the respondent – defendant has furnished the indemnity bonds on 11.12.2007. In these circumstances when the learned trial court had already extended the period to furnish the indemnity bonds and the respondent – defendant has furnished the same within the said extended time, no case to interfere with the impugned order dated 11.12.2007 whereby an application moved by the plaintiff – petitioner to strike off the defence of the respondent – defendant has been dismissed, is made out. Dismissed. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No.1426 of 1989 Present: Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. As per the Office report, notice to the unserved respondents could not be sent as process fee, along with their correct addresses, was not filed. However, instead of keeping this matter pending, I have heard Learned State Counsel on merits. This Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 25.11.1988 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, whereby the respondent – claimants' application to grant them the benefit of Section 23 (1A) of the Land Acquisition Act thereby entitling them to interest @ 12% per annum from the date of Notification till the date of Award passed by the Collector, has been allowed. Concededly, the claimants were entitled to the statutory benefits. Merely because they have failed to incorporate it in the Reference under Section 18 of the Act, would not deprive them the benefit which the statute expressly confers upon them. Consequently, no interference with the impugned order is called for. Dismissed. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.277 of 2005 Present: Shri J.K. Goel, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri Ravinder Hooda, Advocate, for the respondent No.2. The petitioners, along with some other persons, filed CWP No.12210 of 1002 which was allowed by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.8.2004 with a direction to the respondents “to consider the case of the present petitioners for regularization of their services in their respective cadre within a period of six months...”. Alleging non-compliance of the aforesaid direction that this contempt petition has been filed. In response to the show cause notice, the respondents have filed their reply – affidavits. Mr. A.K. Singh – respondent No.2 has averred in his affidavit that services of some of the writ petitioners have already been regularized whereas the petitioners, whose names appear at Serial No.27, 12 and 16 in the seniority list, shall be considered by the respective Screening Committee of their Circle on the basis of their seniority, subject to the availability of vacant posts. In this view of the matter, it is apparent that substantial relief has already been granted and no further action is required to be taken except that a clarificatory direction is issued that as and when vacant posts become available in the Circle to which the petitioners belong, the Screening Committee, as per the undertaking noticed above, shall consider the petitioner's case as per the seniority. Disposed of. Rule discharged. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Miscellaneous No.63-M of 2006 in FAO No.121-M of 2006 Present: Shri R.V.S. Chugh, Advocate, for the applicant-appellant. Shri B.R. Mahajan, Advocate, for the respondent. In deference to the order dated November 12, 2007, the parties are present. Whereas the appellant – wife states that she is ready and willing to go along with her husband, the latter has categorically refused to such an arrangement. In this view of the matter, there appears to be no possibility of a compromise. Adjourned to 24.4.2008 for arguments on the application for maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.634 of 2007 Present: Shri Y.P. Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. This petition has been filed alleging, inter-alia, that the order dated 29.9.2006 passed by this Court in Civil Miscellaneous No.16335-36 in CWP No.11318 of 2006, whereby the respondents were restrained from reducing the pension payable to the petitioner, is not being implemented. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, however, states that the respondents are now paying him pension regularly. In this viw of the matter when the interim order has already been complied, I do not deem it appropriate to continue with these proceedings which are accordingly dropped. Disposed of. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Miscellaneous No.20010-CII of 2006 in FAO No.218-M of 2005 Present: Shri B.S. Bhalla, Advocate, for the applicant-respondent. Shri D.S. Brar, Advocate, for the appellant. The prayer in this application is for recalling of the order dated 31.5.2006 passed by a Division Bench of this Court. Let the matter be listed before the appropriate Bench after obtaining appropriate orders from Hon'ble the Chief Justice. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.1388 of 2006 (O&M) Present: Shri D.S. Patwalia, Advocate, for the petitionerS. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Shri C.M. Munjal, Advocate, for respondents No.4 and 5. After hearing Learned Counsel for the parties, prima-facie, I am satisfied that respondent No.5 is not only obstinate and arrogant but is deliberately harassing the petitioners. It is directed that the original allotment letters in terms of the draw of lots be handed over to the petitioners within three days, failing which respondent No.5 shall be liable to pay exemplary costs. Adjourned to 1.2.2008. URGENT LIST Respondents No.4 and 5 are directed to remain present in Court. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.373 of 2007 Present: Shri R.K. Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. For orders, see C.O.C.P. No.367 of 2007. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.408 of 2007 Present: Shri R.K. Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. For orders, see C.O.C.P. No.367 of 2007. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.1258 of 2007 Present: Shri R.K. Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. For orders, see C.O.C.P. No.367 of 2007. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.1267 of 2007 Present: Shri R.K. Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. For orders, see C.O.C.P. No.367 of 2007. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.1080 of 2007 Present: Shri R.K. Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. For orders, see C.O.C.P. No.367 of 2007. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.354 of 2007 Present: Shri R.K. Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. For orders, see C.O.C.P. No.367 of 2007. Rule discharged. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.355 of 2007 Present: Shri R.K. Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. For orders, see C.O.C.P. No.367 of 2007. Rule discharged. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.409 of 2007 Present: Shri R.K. Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. For orders, see C.O.C.P. No.367 of 2007. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.494 of 2007 Present: Shri R.K. Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. For orders, see C.O.C.P. No.367 of 2007. Rule discharged. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.O.C.P. No.367 of 2007 Date of decision: January 28, 2008. Archana ...Petitioner(s) v. Sadhu Singh Randhawa ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 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. Present: Shri R.K. Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - This order shall dispose of C.O.C.P. Nos.367, 373, 408, 409, 494, 354, 355, 1258 and 1267 of 2007 as all these petitions have arisen out of somewhat similar orders passed by this Court in different Writ Petitions. For the sake of brevity, the facts are being taken from C.O.C.P. No.367 of 2007 (Archana v. Sadhu Ram Randhawa). The petitioner was one of the writ petitioner in CWP No.114 of 2007 which was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court on 9.1.2007 with a direction to the DPI (Secondary Education), Punjab to take a final decision in the representation already made by the petitioner. The said representation was required to be decided in terms of the order dated 27.11.2006 passed in CWP No.18733 of 2006 (Mahesh Kumar v. State of Punjab). In CWP No.18733 of 2006, referred to above, a statement was made on behalf of the official respondents that if the petitioners approach the DPI (S.E.), Punjab with details, their claims shall be adjudicated upon within ten days by passing a speaking order, if the claim is to be rejected. Alternatively, the petitioners were assured that an offer of appointment shall be made. Alleging non-compliance of the aforementioned order that these contempt petitions have been filed in which Learned State Counsel was asked to get instructions. Pursuant thereto, reply – affidavits have been filed by the respondents. It may be noticed here that in sum and substance the petitioners' grievance is that they had appeared for various teaching posts, however, the results of their interviews are not being made public, nor the vacancies, sought to be filled up through the said selection process, are being determined. Presumably, in order to avoid the implications in these contempt proceedings, the respondent has passed certain orders to the effect that the grievance of the petitioners at this stage is premature as a committee comprising of three officers has already been constituted to determine the available vacancies and the results shall be declared depending upon the availability of vacancies in each cadre. Simultaneously, the claim of the petitioners for appointment against the already available posts has been considered and rejected on the ground that they are lower in merit. The respondent is present in Court. On his instructions, Shri G.S. Cheema, learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, states that the committee has already completed most of its exercise and the actual determination of vacancies shall be done within a period of one month and the results of the candidates, like the petitioners, shall be declared within one month thereafter, followed by consequential action as undertaken before the Division Bench of this Court. In other words, the entire exercise shall be completed within a period of two months. In view of the above stated undertaking given on behalf of the respondent, these contempt petitions are disposed of with a clarificatory direction that the needful be done within the period stipulated above, failing which the petitioners shall be entitled to get these contempt proceedings revived and in that event, the respondent shall be liable to compensate the petitioners in terms of costs, besides other penal consequences. Disposed of. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No.4218 of 2007 Present: Shri Puneesh Jindia, Advocate, for the petitioner. It is stated by Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that respondent No.2 need not be served as respondent No.1 alone is the contesting respondent and service upon him has been effected through his son. Accordingly, adjourned to 10.4.2008 for arguments. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No. of 2008 C.O.C.P. No. of 2008 Present: Shri , Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Shri , Advocate, for the respondents. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No. of 2008 C.O.C.P. No. of 2008 Present: Shri , Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Shri , Advocate, for the respondents. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No. of 2008 C.O.C.P. No. of 2008 Present: Shri , Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Shri , Advocate, for the respondents. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No. of 2008 C.O.C.P. No. of 2008 Present: Shri , Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Shri , Advocate, for the respondents. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No. of 2008 C.O.C.P. No. of 2008 Present: Shri , Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Shri , Advocate, for the respondents. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No. of 2008 C.O.C.P. No. of 2008 Present: Shri , Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Shri , Advocate, for the respondents. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No. of 2008 C.O.C.P. No. of 2008 Present: Shri , Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Shri , Advocate, for the respondents. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No. of 2008 C.O.C.P. No. of 2008 Present: Shri , Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Shri , Advocate, for the respondents. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No. of 2008 C.O.C.P. No. of 2008 Present: Shri , Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Shri , Advocate, for the respondents. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No. of 2008 C.O.C.P. No. of 2008 Present: Shri , Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Shri , Advocate, for the respondents. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No. of 2008 C.O.C.P. No. of 2008 Present: Shri , Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Shri , Advocate, for the respondents. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No. of 2008 C.O.C.P. No. of 2008 Present: Shri , Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Cheema, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Shri , Advocate, for the respondents. January 28, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge