C.W.P.No.6268 of 1987 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No. 6268 of 1987 Date of decision: October 27, 2006 Messrs Ram Partap Ram Gopal, Mandi Adampur (Hissar) v. The State of Haryana and others Present: Mr. Sapan Dhir, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms.Ritu Bahri, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent. CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal 1. Whether Reporters of local papers maybe allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Rajesh Bindal, J. (Oral) A perusal of order dated 13.11.1987 shows that the writ petition was ordered to be put up after the decision of L.P.A. No.420 of 1987. On September 13, 1988, the writ petition was admitted. When the case was taken up for hearing on 14.7.2006, it was pointed by learned counsel for the petitioner that L.P.A. No.420 of 1987 was still pending before this Court. Accordingly, on that date, the following order was passed: “A perusal of order dated 13.11.1987 shows that the case was to be put after the decision of L.P.A. No.420 of 1987. Thereafter, on 13.9.1988 the same was admitted. Counsel for the petitioner points out that LPA No.420 of 1987 is still pending wherein the issue involved is similar to one raised in the present writ petition. Let this writ petition be put up in the motion hearing after the decision of the aforesaid LPA.” The case has been put up for hearing by the office again with the report that L.P.A. No.420 of 1987 was decided by this Court on 27.11.1989. C.W.P.No.6268 of 1987 [2] It is not disputed that the issues involved in the present petition are the same as were considered by this Court while deciding C.W.P. No.6562 of 1986 on 4.8.1987- Mahavir Dall & General Mills v. State of Haryana and others, against which the dealers had preferred L.P.A. No.420 of 1987- Mahavir Dall & General Mills v. State of Haryana and others, which was dismissed on 27.11.1989. For the reasons stated in Mahavir Dall & General Mills' case (supra), the present writ petition is disposed of in the same terms. ( Rajesh Bindal ) Judge 27.10.2006 mk