IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No. 15006 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION : SEPTEMBER 24, 2009 DR. ARUNA DEWAN ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. HS Dhindsa, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) This petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing order dated 10.4.2008 (Annexure P-11) whereby the request of the petitioner dated 18.8.2007 for regularisation of her services on completion of 4 years of service, has been rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the issue is covered by the order passed by this Court in CWP 10782 of 2009 (Dr. Civil Writ Petition No. 15006 of 2009 2 Jatinder Syal and others v. State of Punjab and another) decided on 1.9.2009. Notice of motion. On the asking of the Court, Ms.Charu Tuli, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Heard. In the petition, it has been pleaded that the petitioner was appointed as a Medical Officer on adhoc basis on 18.3.1988. The services of the petitioner were regularised on 17.1.1996, vide order dated 17.4.1996. The claim in the petition is that the services of the petitioner deserve to be regularised with effect from 17.3.1992 i.e. on completion of 4 years of service. It has been pleaded that the issue in the case of large number of doctors was raised. A Committee was constituted under the Chairmanship of Justice S.S. Sandhawalia, former Chief Justice. The Committee made recommendations to the effect that the services of the doctors be regularised with effect from the date of completion of 4 years of service. The recommendations of Justice S.S. Sandhawalia Committee were accepted by the State of Punjab. Relief, however, was not given to all the persons. A large number of doctors have already approached this Court by way of filing separate petitions and orders have been passed in terms of the recommendations of Justice S.S. Sandhawalia Committee, adopted by the State of Punjab. Learned counsel for the respondent-State states that, indeed, the issue would be covered by the judgment in Dr. Jatinder Syal's case Civil Writ Petition No. 15006 of 2009 3 (supra). Considering the above, this petition is allowed in the same terms as the order passed by this Court in CWP 10782 of 2009 (Dr. Jatinder Syal and others v. State of Punjab and another) decided on 1.9.2009. The respondents are directed to consider the matter and necessary orders be issued within a period of 4 months of receipt of certified copy of this order. September 24, 2009 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?