LPA No. 244 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH LPA No. 244 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 2, 2011 State of Punjab and others …Appellants Versus Pushpinder Kumar and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. Suvir Sehgal, Addl. A.G., Punjab for the appellants. Mr. N.K. Suneja, Advocate for the respondents. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. The instant appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment dated 23.10.2008 rendered by the learned Single Judge holding that the writ petitioner-respondents are oustees of Ranjit Sagar Dam Project and are entitled to be considered for employment either at Ranjit Sagar Dam Project or as envisaged by letter dated 08.05.2000 (P-9) at any other project in the State of Punjab. The learned Single Judge has also directed the appellant-State to pass an appropriate order within three months from the date of a receipt of copy of that order. 2. When the matter came up for hearing on 28.07.2010 then the learned State counsel has argued that a SLP has been filed against the Letter Patent Bench judgment dated 21.10.2010, which was upheld the view of the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 787 of 2008, decided on 26.11.2009. The SLP was pending and the LPA No. 244 of 2010 (O&M) -2- operation of the judgment rendered by the Letters Patent Bench was stayed. In the application filed by the writ petitioner- respondents, it has been pointed out that the Special Leave Petition No. 9521 of 2010 (R-6) filed by the appellant-State has now been dismissed by extending time for implementation upto 30.04.2011. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and are of the view that the matter is squarely covered by the judgment rendered in the case of State of Punjab and others v. Dharam Singh & others (LPA No. 1412 of 2009 decided on 21.01.2010. The Division Bench judgment has now attained finality upto Hon'ble the Supreme Court (R-6). The basis of order staying the operation of the impugned judgment was the pendency of the SLP and the stay order passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in SLP No. 9521 of 2010. However, the SLP stands now dismissed and the view taken by this Court has attained finality. 4. In view of the above, the appeal is dismissed. However, the period for implementation of the direction issued by the learned Single Judge is extended to 30.06.2011 from today. 5. In view of the dismissal of the appeal on merit, we do not wish to pass any order on the application seeking condonation of 338 days' delay in filing of the appeal. 6. A copy of this order be given dasti to learned State counsel on payment of usual charges. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (GURDEV SINGH) JUDGE May 02, 2011 Atul