LPA No. 1650 of 2011 -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH LPA No. 1650 of 2011 Date of Decision: 22.11.2011 Piara Singh and others ...Appellants Versus State of Punjab and others ..Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta Hon'ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia Present: Mr.Amarjit Singh, Advocate for the appellants. Hemant Gupta, J. The present appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is directed against the order passed by Single Judge of this Court whereby the writ petitioner challenging the order dated 19.1.2011, declining representation of the appellants was dismissed. The appellants were engaged in the Adult Education Scheme framed by the Central Govt. and worked between 6th June, 1986 to 13.5.1988. The said Scheme was abolished in the year 1991 and the appellants were declared surplus w.e.f. 1.7.1991. Earlier, the appellants filed a writ petition before this Court which was decided by Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 27.11.1991. The relevant directions are as under: “4. The arrears of pay calculated on the regular scale upto 30.6.1991 will be paid to the petitioners within four months from today. 5. The Government shall made an attempt to adjust the petitioners in some suitable employment as expeditiously as LPA No. 1650 of 2011 -2- possible.” An appeal filed by the State of Punjab against the said judgment was partly accepted when direction No.5 was set aside whereas direction No.4 was upheld. The Division Bench has observed that direction No.5 of the learned Single Judge appears to be advisory and not mandatory. The Court ordered as under: “The appeal is accordingly partly allowed by upholding the judgment of the learned Single Judge insofar as the manner and direction regarding equal pay for equal work is concerned. The appellants are held not obliged to adjust the writ petitioners in any other employment unless the writ petitioners apply for the post and they are found fit for the same in accordance with the law applicable at the relevant time.” After many years, the appellants filed another writ petition CWP No.18764 of 2005 which was decided by Division Bench of this Court on 1.12.2005 with liberty to the writ petitioners to submit a detailed representation within a period of 15 days. The Competent Authority was to take final decision within one month. In terms of the said direction, order (Annexure P-4) has been passed on 19.12.2007 and it is the said order which is challenged by the appellant before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India after more than three years. The said writ petition was dismissed inter alia on the ground of delay as well as on merits. A perusal of the record shows that earlier the appellants claimed a direction for absorption but such direction though granted by the learned Single Judge, was set aside by Division Bench of this Court. It appears that the order passed by this Court permitting the appellant to submit representation was in ignorance of the earlier order LPA No. 1650 of 2011 -3- passed in the Letters Patent Appeal mentioned above. In terms of the second writ petition, the representation has been declined. Once the claim of the appellants has been examined and decision has attained finality, the invocation of the jurisdiction of the Court is nothing but the abuse of process of law. Consequently, we do not find any merit in the present appeal and the same is hereby dismissed. ( Hemant Gupta ) Judge (G.S. Sandhawalia) 22.11.2011 Judge Meenu