HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.2917 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 16.02.2011 **** Gurmail Kaur & Ors. . . . . Petitioners VS. State of Punjab & Ors. . . . . Respondents **** 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: Mr. Naveen Sheoran, Advocate for the petitioners **** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) (1). Notice of motion. Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, learned DAG Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent No.1. In view of the nature of order which I propose to pass, there is no need to seek any reply/affidavit on behalf of the respondents at this stage. (2). The petitioners, who are working as Mali and Sweepers in the respondent-Corporation, seek direction to the respondents to consider them for regularization of their services in terms of the Punjab Govt. Policy dated 15.12.2006 (Annexure P2) as well as order dated 01.10.2010 read with the Circular dated 22.01.2010 (Annexure P1) issued by the respondent-authorities. CWP No.2917 of 2011.doc - 2 – (3). The petitioners’ grievance is that pursuant to the orders passed in the cases of similarly-situated employees while their services have been regularized but the petitioners have been denied the similar treatment without assigning any reason. (4). Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners at some length and keeping in view the nature of relief sought, however, without expressing any views on the merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondents No.2 & 3 to consider and dispose of the claim of the petitioners in accordance with law/policy or past instances within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (5). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 16.02.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge