ORDER KARAMAT NAZIR BHANDARI, J. - In the report and para were comments received under the signatures of Deputy Director Education (Colleges), the claim of petitioner is that he was placed at serial' No. 9 of the merit list has not been denied. It is also not denied that appointment letter was to be issued by the target dated i.e. 23.2.1997, as advertised. It is submitted that the appointment letter was not issued in view of ban imposed by the Government1 vide letter dated 22.2,1997.
2. Similar question came up before me in number of wwith petitions including Writ Petition No. 23531 of 1997, which were heard and decided on 18.11.1997. It \yes held that the imposition of ban by way of letter was declared as without lawful authority and respondents were^directed to issue the necessary appointment letters within 15 days. The argument that there is still a ban on fresh appointments. Will not be available in this case as if is not a case of fresh appointment, ft is a case of fructification of the process of appointment, which was stopped under an illegal order of the Government.
3. For the above reasons this petition is allowed. Respondents are hereby directed to issue appointment letter to the petitioner within a period of 15 days from. Today Parties are left to bear their on costs. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.