CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7264 OF 2011 :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: JULY 15 ,2011 Ramesh Kumar and others .....Petitioners VERSUS State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr. Sandeep Goyat, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Sunil Nehra, Sr.DAG, Haryana, for the State. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. This order will dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos.7264, 7947 and 10168 of 2011. The facts are being taken from Civil Writ Petition No.7264 of 2011. The petitioners have challenged the action of the respondents in not calling them for interview for the post of Driver (Heavy Transport Vehicle), advertisement for which was published in the year 2009. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7264 OF 2011 :{ 2 }: Response has been filed to the petition on behalf of Haryana Staff Selection Commission. It is disclosed in the reply that the respondent-Commission got conducted the driving proficiency test through the Transport Department, Haryana, during the months of November and December, 2010 and on the basis of said test, only those candidates were called for interview, who had qualified in this test. The petitioners had appeared in the driving proficiency test against their roll numbers and dates as indicate in para 5 of the writ petition. They, however, could not qualify in the event of road test and as such remained unsuccessful in the said test. They have, therefore, not been called for interview. Counsel for the petitioner refers to the averments made in the petition that the driving test was recorded on a video and his whole emphasis would be that this video would show that the petitioners were efficient and proficient drivers and have wrongly been failed in the said test. The petitioners have applied for copy of this video. Mr.Nehra says that the petitioners have been advised to obtain the same from the Transport Department. The petitioners, if so advised, may obtain copy of the video from the Transport Department and if they find that any material contained in the video support their case, they would be at liberty to make a fresh approach before this Court. These writ petitions, at this stage, are dismissed with liberty afore-mentioned. July 15, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE