CWP NO.10659 OF 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: 7.9. 2011 Haryana Judicial Employees Association through President, Ramesh Dhankadr, District & Sessions Court, Rohtak ...Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and another …Respondent CORAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI PRESENT: Ms.Seema Pasricha, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Anoop Sharma, AAG, Haryana for respondent no.1 Mr.GS Sandhawalia, Advocate for respondent no.2 Permod Kohli, J. (Oral) Short reply has been filed by way of an affidavit of Vinay Singh, Deputy Secretary to Government of Haryana, Administration of Justice Department on behalf of respondent no.1. In paragraph 2 of the reply, it is specifically mentioned that the State Government has agreed to implement the recommendations made in the Shetty Commission report as claimed in the writ petition. The recommendations sought to be implemented have been enlisted from paragraphs i. to viii of the reply. Mr.Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that in so far as the CWP NO.10659 OF 2010 2 directions to the State are concerned, the same shall be implemented within a period of two months. In so far as the directions required to be complied with by the High Court/District Courts are concerned, Mr. Sandhawalia, learned counsel for respondent no.2 has referred to paragraph 8 of the reply filed on behalf of respondent no.2 in the writ petition. One of the directions of the Shetty Commission relates to making provisions for staff of recruitment cell for each district court. From the averments made in paragraph 8 of the reply, it appears that the High Court has principally taken a decision to constitute a Central Recruitment Committee with respect to the recruitment in all the subordinate courts. In this view of the matter, the provisions of staff for recruitment cell in each district court may not be needed. However, if the High Court decides to allow the district courts to make recruitment, in that eventuality, adequate provisions shall be made for providing staff in the recruitment cells of the district courts. In view of the above circumstances, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the State to implement all the recommendations enlisted in the reply and any other recommendation that may be required to be implemented by the State, within two months. In so far as the recommendations requiring implementation by the High Court are concerned, the High Court will ensure that such recommendations are implemented expeditiously. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 7.9.2011 MFK CWP No.10585 of 2010 3