IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.19263 of 2009 Date of Decision : March 04, 2010. Kailasho Devi and others .....Petitioners versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Ajay Pal Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners. -.- 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? --- ORDER Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioners are aggrieved at the selection and appointment of respondent No.5 as Anganwari Worker of Village Gaji Salar, Teshil Samana, District Patiala. It is, inter-alia alleged that while the petitioners are residents of the same village and have a preferential right, yet respondent No.4, who belongs to village Rajla, Tehsil Samana, District Patiala, has been appointed. Various other factual pleas have also been taken by the petitioners to question the selection and appointment of respondent No.4. Suffice it to say that the facts based contention raised on behalf of the petitioners needs to be verified by the respondent-authorities. C.W.P.No .19263 of 2009 2 The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to submit a comprehensive representation to respondent No.2 within a period of one months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order, which shall then be considered and disposed of by respondent No.2 by passing a speaking order in accordance with law and the Government Policy, as early as possible but not later than four months. Dasti. March 4, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE