IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 5444 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION: August 26, 2009 Anita .........PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab and Another ......RESPONDENT(S) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA Present: Mr. H.S. Sethi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Charu Tuli, Sr. DAG, Punjab. AJAI LAMBA, J. (ORAL) This civil writ petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to give the petitioner appointment as Science Mistress. Essentially, it has been pleaded on behalf of the petitioner that a person lower in merit to the petitioner has been appointed. Four posts have been left to be filled in the category of Ex-Servicemen are now going to be filled up de hors the merit of the petitioner. It has been pointed out that the last person who has been selected and given appointment has 62.313 merit marks whereagainst the petitioner has 63.558 merit marks. Notice of motion was issued . Short affidavit of Ms. Harcharanjit Kaur Brar, Director of Public C.W.P. No. 5444 of 2008 -2- Instructions (S.E.), Punjab has been filed on behalf of respondents no. 1 & 2 today in Court which is taken on record. It has been brought out that the petitioner claims selection as Science Mistress in the category of Ex-servicemen (SC) being higher in merit in female Ex-servicemen (SC category). The grievance of the petitioner has been redressed. Letter of appointment has been issued in the category of Ex-servicemen (SC) Annexure R-1 dated 24.08.2009. In view of the stand of the respondents, no cause of action survives. On the assertion of right of the petitioner to be considered appointed from the date of selection and particularly from the date when a person lower in merit has been given appointment, learned counsel for the respondent states that all the benefits to which the petitioner is entitled would be released including seniority. With the above observations, the petition is disposed of as infructuous. 26.08.2009 (AJAI LAMBA) shivani JUDGE 1. To be referred to the reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?