IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 15127 of 2007 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 22, 2009 Tarsem Singh ...... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari Present: Mr. S.N.Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Rathee, Senior DAG, Haryana. **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Ajay Tewari, J. The petitioner claims appointment to the post of Constable on two grounds; the first is that against two posts only he was selected. It is not disputed that earlier the petitioner had filed CWP No. 11061 of 2004, however, admittedly this plea was not taken in that petition. Consequently the petitioner would be debarred from taking this plea in the present petition. The second ground is that in fact the respondent No.6 was facing trial but did not disclose the fact in his application form. On this ground his argument is twofold. Firstly it is argued that in the application form the information which was to be supplied was whether the applicant CWP No. 15127 of 2007 -2- had ever been arrested. The second argument is that respondent No.6 was acquitted in trial in 2004 and, therefore, there can be no cloud on his appointment. In my opinion no fault can be found with the action of the respondents. Dismissed. No costs. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE May 22, 2009 sunita