IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.16212 of 2008 Date of Decision: October 05, 2009 Manjit Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Akshay Kumar Goel, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Charu Tuli, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent Nos.1 to 3. None for respondent Nos.4 to 17. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) By way of this petition, Manjit Singh (petitioner) claims right to selection as Head Master with the contention that he has higher marks as per the criteria laid down in advertisement (Annexure P-5). Reply by way of short affidavit of Jagjit Singh Sidhu, Deputy Director (School Administration), Office of Director of Public Instructions (SE), Punjab, has been filed. The stand of the respondents in Para 2 of the CWP No.16212 of 2008 [2] affidavit is to the following effect:- “2. That the grievance of the petitioner has been redressed as the name of the petitioner has been recommended for the purpose of appointment of the petitioner to the post of Headmaster in the Ex-servicemen male category. However, it would not be out of place to mention here that, since all the posts of Headmasters in the category of Ex-servicemen Male have already been filled up. Hence, in order to accommodate the petitioner, the respondents have to dispense with the services of last selected candidate in his category by adopting the due procedure in accordance with the law.” On perusal of the above extracted portion, it transpires that name of the petitioner has been recommended for the purpose of appointment as Head Master in Ex-Servicemen (Male) category. The person with minimum percentage of marks is required to be given show cause notice. Stand of the respondents makes it evident that cause of action does not survive. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous, however, with direction to the respondents to complete the process within two months of receipt of a certified copy of the order. (AJAI LAMBA) October 05, 2009 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?