COCP No. 1661 of 2009 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh … COCP No. 1661 of 2009(O&M) Date of decision: September 11, 2009 Kamaljit Singh son of Sewa Singh ..Petitioner Versus Shri A.K. Soni, S.E.,Water Supply and Sanitation Circle Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg Present: Mr. K.L.Arora, Advocate for the petitioner ,,, Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.(Oral) As per the averments made in this petition, the petitioner was registered with the Employment Exchange. The respondent-department sent requisition to the Employment Exchange, Jalandhar. The petitioner was called for interview and was selected for the post of Pump Operator. Petitioner filed CWP No. 90 of 2009 inter alia praying therein that his appointment was in accordance with law and he has completed more than 10 years of service and he should be considered and regularized against the post of Pump Operator. The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of vide judgment dated 7.1.2009 with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Secretary State of Karnataka and others Versus Uma Devi within a period of four months and pass the resultant order. It is the further case of the petitioner that respondent vide order dated 31.3.2009 (Annexure P-3) rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that he had less than 10 years of service as on 10.4.2006 and therefore, in accordance with the policy instructions issued by the Government on COCP No. 1661 of 2009 2 15.12.2006, he was not entitled to be regularized. Thus, according to the petitioner, the respondent has disobeyed the directions of this court as his case was not considered in terms of Uma Devi's case (supra). I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record of this petition. A perusal of the speaking order Annexure P-3 showed that the date of joining of the petitioner with the respondent-department is 2.6.1997 and his seniority number is 1798, whereas till date, employees upto seniority No. 638 have been regularized. It is the specific case of the respondent that regularization of the employees is being done strictly according to their seniority in the concerned category against the available sanctioned vacant posts with the department. Thus, from the aforesaid reasoning, it cannot be inferred that the respondents have willfully disobeyed the directions of this court while considering the case of the petitioner. Thus,no contempt is made out. Dismissed. September 11, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) nk JUDGE