IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.18143 of 2009 Date of Decision: July 22, 2010 Parjesh Kumar & Others .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Y.M. Bhagirath, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This 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 respondents to grant relief/benefits in terms of judgment rendered by this Court while dealing with Civil Writ Petition No.15554 of 2007 (Gian Chand & Others vs. State of Punjab), decided on 21.7.2008. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the issue was raised before this Court. A Division Bench of this Court while dealing with the same has quashed Circular dated 29.7.2003, CWP No.18143 of 2009 [2] which is under challenge in this petition also. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent- State contends that indeed, the issue is covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in Gian Chand’s case (supra). Circular dated 29.7.2003 has been quashed by this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent- State, however, states that the State of Punjab has gone up in appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India against the judgment rendered in Gian Chand’s case (supra), by way of filing of a Special Leave Petition, which is pending. 5. In view of the conceded position that this petition is covered by the judgment rendered by this Court while dealing with Civil Writ Petition No.15554 of 2007 (Gian Chand & Others vs. State of Punjab), decided on 21.7.2008, this petition is allowed in the same terms. 6. It is, however, made clear that this order shall remain subject to the outcome of the Special Leave Petition pending in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and the petitioners shall be entitled to seek implementation of the judgment through contempt or otherwise only after disposal of the Special Leave Petition. (AJAI LAMBA) July 22, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? CWP No.18143 of 2009 [3] 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?