IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.20059 of 2010 Date of Decision: November 22, 2010 Mohit Rishi & others .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab and another .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Puneet Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioners. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent-State to fill 244 posts of Up-Vaidya (Pharmacist/ Dispenser) in the State of Punjab. 2. It has been brought out that the petitioners are eligible to be appointed as Up-Vaidya. The services of the Up-Vaidya are governed by the Punjab Ayurvedic Department (Class III – Technical) Service Rules, 1963. The rules provide for sanctioned posts of Up-Vaidya CWP No.20059 of 2010 [2] to be filled upto 50% by way of direct recruitment. 3. It has been specifically pleaded in Para 4 of the petition that 244 posts of Up-Vaidya have been lying vacant for the last about 10 years. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that it is the duty of the Executive to fill the posts, once a provision there for has been provided. The purpose of having the posts is defeated if the same are not filled. Other than this, the posts are filled to the extent of 50% by way of promotion, however, the posts to be filled by way of direct recruitment are lying vacant. 5. Notice of motion. 6. On the asking of the Court, Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondents. Requisite number of copies of the petition have been given to learned counsel for the respondents. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent- State says that instructions have been taken from the Director, Ayurveda and he has been given to understand by the said officer that the matter is under active consideration. 8. The petition is disposed of with CWP No.20059 of 2010 [3] direction to respondent Nos.1 and 2 to take decision on the issue within a period of three months of receipt of certified copy of this order. (AJAI LAMBA) November 22, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?