Harjeet Singh And ORS v. State Of Punjab And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Letters Patent Appeal No.963 of 2015 (O&M) Date of Decision: August 07, 2015 Harjit Singh and others .....Appellants versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BAJANTHRI.

Present: Mr.Jai Bhagwan, Advocate, for the appellants. -.-

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? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) This letters patent appeal is directed against the order dated 23.09.2014 whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the appellant' writ petition in which they sought their reinstatement as adhoc clerks in the Sessions Division at Ludhiana.

Learned Single Judge has held that the appellants were appointed on adhoc basis and it was so expressly stipulated in the advertisement. In the appointment letters also it was made clear that they will work on adhoc basis till the regular appointments are made. It was further stipulated in the appointment letters that their services shall be liable to be terminated at any time without any notice.

Learned counsel for the appellants at the outset submits that out of 10 appellants, 9 have since been adjusted/ re-appointed by the learned Sessions Judge on account of

LPA No.963 of 2015 (O&M) [2] increased work-load in the sessions division and only one appellant, namely, Shaminder Pal Singh (appellant No.3) is left out.

Having heard learned counsel for the appellants, though we do not find any merit in this appeal, however, we have no reason to doubt that if the work and conduct of appellant No.3, during his adhoc basis service was to the entire satisfaction and if there is need of additional man-power in the exigency of services, the learned Single Judge shall sympathetically consider the request of appellant No.3 as well for his adjustment on adhoc basis till the vacancy is filled up on regular basis.

The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE August 07, 2015 [P.B.BAJANTHRI] mohinder JUDGE

LPA No.963 of 2015 (O&M) [3] CM Nos.2012 & 2013 of 2015 in LPA No.963 of 2015.

- - - Harjit Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others ---- Present : Mr.Jai Bhagwan, Advocate, for the applicant-appellants.

* * * For the reasons mentioned in the applications, the same are allowed subject to all just exceptions and 52 days' delay in re-filing and 125 days' delay in filing the appeal are condoned.

CMs stand disposed of.

(SURYA KANT) JUDGE August 07, 2015 (P.B.BAJANTHRI) mohinder JUDGE