COCP No. 1209 of 2007 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh … COCP No. 1209 of 2007(O&M) Date of decision: November 9, 2009 Rupali Verma d/o Tarsem Lal Verma .. Petitioner Versus Dr. Kanwal Paul Singh and another ..Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg Present: None for the petitioner Mr. S.S.Sahu, AAG, Punjab for the respondent .. Rakesh Kumar Garg,J(Oral) As per the averments made in COCP 1209 of 2007 , this court vide order dated 27.11.2006 and 5.12.2006 (Annxures P-1 to P-3) directed the respondents not to substitute the services of the petitioner by appointing another Guest Faculty Lecturer on ad hoc basis by terminating her services.The grievance of the petitioner in this petition is that in spite of the aforesaid directions, the respondents appointed one Ajay Kumar in her place as Guest Faculty Lecturer in the subject of Punjabi and thus have disobeyed the order passed by this court. Another COCP No. 1352 of 2007 filed by Ajay Kumar aforesaid submitting that vide judgment dated 30.3.2007 passed in CWP No. 19702 of 2006, the respondents were directed not to dispense with his services by engaging ad hoc Guest Faculty Lecturers and his service could be terminated only on availability of regular appointees. In spite of the aforesaid direction, the respondent has orally told the petitioner that his services have been dispensed with so that Rupali Verma can be allowed to join. Thus the respondents have committed of the court. Vide order dated 26.11.2007, COCP 1209 of 2007 was ordered to COCP No. 1209 of 2007 2 be listed along with COCP No.1352 of 2007, hence, both the petitioins are being disposed of by a common judgment. At the out set, Mr. S.S. Sahu, learned A.A.G. Punjab appearing on behalf of the respondents on instructions from Mr. N.D. Bhatia, Principal, Government College, Talwara states that both the petitioners in the aforesaid contempt petition are ordinary hands as Guest Faculty Lecturer in respondent College and therefore they does not have any cause of action to file the present petition. In view of the fact that the petitioners are working as Guest Faculty Lecturers and there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners to contradict the aforesaid statement made by the counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, I am not inclined to proceed further in this petition. Rule discharged. However, the petitioners shall be at liberty to revive the aforesaid contempt petition, if the statement made by the counsel for the petitioner is not correct. November 9, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) nk JUDGE