SURINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this judgment, we propose to dispose of this appeal as well as connected two writ petitions as the common question of law and facts are involved therein. For brevity, the facts are taken from Letters Patent Appeal No. 1598 of 2010.

(2.) The order of the learned Single Judge which is impugned by way of present intra court appeal is of one paragraph order whereby writ petition was disposed of in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Punjab and others Vs. Arun Kumar Aggarwal, 2007 5 SLR 237. The learned Single Judge has not discussed the nuances of the controversy involved in the writ petition and has also not given any reasons as to how the matter is covered by the judgment. It has happened because of the reason that counsel for all the parties had conceded that the matter is covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Arun Kumar Aggarwal's case which can be noticed from the impugned order. We thus reproduce that order hereunder:-

(3.) As per the judgment in Arun Kumar Aggarwal's case , the appellants herein (petitioners in the writ petition) are not to be given any relief, inasmuch as certain percentage of the posts of Sub Divisional Officers/Assistant Engineers to which they are claiming their exclusive right to be considered being degree-holders, have to be filled up from the diploma holders as per the decision of Arun Kumar Aggarwal's case .