(1.) - The petitioners are employees of the Punjab State Electricity Board (hereinafter preferred to as 'the Board'). On 23rd June, 1989, when they were appearing in the Ministerial Establishment Departmental Accounts Examination held by the Board at Ferozepur centre, they staged a walk-out and as a result thereof they were debarred from appearing in the examination for the coming two years under Regulation 9(4) of the Punjab State Electricity Board Ministerial Establishment Departmental Accounts Commission Regulations, 1988. Later on, the Board decided to cancel the examination of second paper and to hold the examination afresh. Since the petitioners stood debarred from appearing in the examination for a period of two years in pursuance of the orders dated 2nd August, 1989 (Annexure P-1 and P-2), the petitioners invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court for quashing of the impugned orders dated 2nd August, 1989, inter alia on the ground that no opportunity of being heard has been afforded to the petitioners before passing the impugned orders, as also for challenging the same on the basis of arbitrariness, discrimination, victimisation, etc.
(2.) In the written statement filed by the respondent Board, the factual position has been admitted and the impugned action is sought to be justified on the ground that in the special circumstances of the case, opportunity of hearing could not be afforded to the petitioners.
(3.) After the writ petition was admitted, by an interim order, the petitioners were allowed to appear in the next examination held in May, 1990, at their own risk and responsibility. Though this direction was obviously subject to final decision of the writ petition, but the fact stands that the petitioners have since appeared in the examination and more than a year has passed. I feel that ends of justice would be adequately met if the result of the examination in which the petitioners have already appeared, is declared on merits, as it would render the petition infructuous.