CWP No. 9686 of 2008 - 1 - In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. Date of decision: 04.05.2009 CWP No. 9686 of 2008 Sandeep Singh ... Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab and others ... Respondents CWP No.6175 of 2008 Pinderpal Singh and another ... Petitioners Versus The State of Punjab and others ... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI Present: Mr.G.S. Sirphikhi, Advocate,for the petitioners. Mr.BS Chahal, DAG, Punjab, for the respondents. Mr.KS Sidhu and Mr.HS Mann, Advocates, for respondent Nos.3 and 4. -- PERMOD KOHLI, J. (Oral): The petitioners claim to have applied for the post of Multi Purpose Health Workers (for short MPHW) consequent upon the advertisement dated 01.09.2006. As many as 656 posts of MPHW (Male) on contract basis were advertised. This advertisement was published in the newspaper Ajit, Annexure P-1. The petitioners have not been selected. The petitiones have questioned their non-selection. The stand of the respondents is that the petitioners did not appear for counseling which was held on 25 and 26 December, 2006, whereas the date for counselling were duly notified vide Annexure P-1, i.e. CWP No. 9686 of 2008 - 2 - Main Advertisement notice itslef. This fact has not been disputed. The petitioners claim that they participated in the counseling, whereas the stand of the State-respondents is that the petitioners did not participated in the counseling. The respondents have also produced photo-stat copy of the original record that the petitioners were absent on the dates of the scrutiny. In view of the above circumstances, there are disputed questions of fact to the effect whether the petitioners participated in the counseling or absented on the said dates. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks to withdraw the writ petitions with liberty to seek appropriate remedy in a Civil Court . Petitions are dismissed as withdrawn. Petitioners are at liberty to seek appropriate remedy in Civil Court. 04.05.2009 (PERMOD KOHLI) BLS JUDGE