Mohali, November 30
Shastri Model School held an annual prize distribution function in which cabinet minister Manoranjan Kalia was the chief guest. Madan Mohan Mittal, former minister, Punjab, presided over the function and Jasjeet Singh Bunny, general secretary, Youth Akali Dal, were the guest of honour Principal R. Bala read out the annual report of the school. School manager Ram Lal Sewak stressed upon keeping the teachings of Shastriji alive.

Students participate in a face painting competition at Manav Mangal Smart School in Mohali on Friday. — Tribune photo: Vicky Gharu

QUIZ: A three-day multi event extravaganza, aimed at providing a platform to the budding talent of the youngsters of the tricity in various literary, artistic and cultural activities that started at Manav Mangal Smart School here yesterday, saw a whole lot of activities on the second day today. Enthusiastic students from various schools participated in a quiz contest.

ANNUAL DAY: Students of Lawerance Public Senior Secondary School celebrated their annual function. D.R. Yadav, joint secretary, regional officer, CBSE Panchkula, presided over the function. The chief guest honoured the students for their excellence in the field of education. Veena Malhotra thanked the chief guest and the parents for co-operation and requested the parents to devote more time towards their children. 

Chandigarh, November 30
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has set aside the PGI governing body’s decision to re-advertise allergy and immunology post, while ruling that the case appears to indicate “persistent and unjustified denial of due” to be the factor, which impelled “competent and eligible medical personnel to settle for foreign shores”.

Pronouncing the orders on a petition filed by Dr Sunit C. Singhi, Justice S.D. Anand of the high court ruled: “The exodus of experts, medical personnel in particular, has been the bane of our system. Whether for want of sincerity or whatever other cause, the endeavours at stemming the rot have not been noticeably successful. The present case would appear to indicate one major factor, which would impel competent/eligible medical personnel to settle for foreign shores in view of the persistent and unjustified denial of their due in their own country.”

Elaborating, Justice Anand further ruled: “The petitioner is a postgraduate medico, with impeccable academic credentials. Notwithstanding his eligibility in terms of the required qualifications and experience, he was initially denied an interview call for inexplicable reasons.”

A grievance made by him brought forth an interview call, which again, for equally inexplicable reasons, was described to be provisional in character. Further, in spite of the fact that the appointment of the petitioner to the post of Professor of Paediatrics (allergy & immunology) was twice recommended by the selection committee, the governing body opted to just say in the proceedings that the post be re-advertised.

In his petition, Dr Singhi had earlier sought directions to the PGI and other official respondents to appoint him to the post of Professor of pediatrics (allergy and immunology) “in terms of the recommendations of the statutory selection committee with effect from December 15, 1999, when persons in the same selection were appointed”. He had also challenged the appointment of Dr Anil Narang to the post of Professor of pediatrics (neo-natology).

Justice Anand held: “In the first instance, it was inappropriate on the part of the respondent PGI to have withheld the issuance of interview letter to the petitioner. The infraction was compounded by describing the interview letter, subsequently issued on representation, to be provisional in character. A more sagacious and competent approach, in the context, was expected.”

Partly allowing Dr Singhi’s petition, Justice Anand held: “It is apparent that the governing body had no justification whatsoever to take a decision to re-advertise the post, particularly when no reason had at all been recorded in the course of the proceedings.”

Directing the governing body to reconsider the matter, Justice Anand asked it to “take whatever decision it wanted to in the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case”. Justice Anand added: “The power to take a decision lies with the governing body. The only rider thereupon indicated by this court is with regard to the recording of reasons in the context of the decision taken by it. The exercise shall be concluded by the governing body within one month.

Dismissing the part of petition challenging Dr Narang’s appointment, the judge held: “The petitioner cannot validly have a grievance qua the validity of the appointment of the respondent to the post of Professor of pediatrics (neo-natology) in view of the fact that it was indicated in the advertisement itself that the qualification and experience required were relaxable. In his own wisdom, the petitioner did not opt to apply for the post. Though the respondent did not have the minimum experience, he was appointed in terms of the relaxation clause.” 

Chandigarh, November 30
The Punjab and Haryana Bar Council’s returning officer has written to deputy commissioners and senior police officers of Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh seeking security deployment during the forthcoming bar council elections.

This was stated by returning officer, bar council, Punjab and Haryana, Rajeev Duggal at a press conference here yesterday.

Duggal said additional security would be needed at sensitive polling booths to ensure fair elections.

He also hinted at getting the entire process of voting videographed at the sensitive polling station in Faridabad to check any kind of manipulation by candidates.

He added that voters were expected to carry their identity card, which could be a identity card issued by the bar council.

The advocates could also use the original enrollment certificate or card issued by the district bar association as identity proof but they need to be accompanied by a driver’s licence, ration card, passport, identity card issued by the election commission.

Chandigarh, November 30
Taking serious note of delay in maturity of saplings supplied by WIMCO Seedlings Limited Company, the Consumer Disputes Forum has directed the company to pay Rs 50,000 in compensation to a Sector 19 resident.

The company has also been told to give the petitioner Rs 5,000 as litigation expenses.

The petitioner, Kirpal, had booked 650 one-year-old poplar tree saplings with the company after depositing Rs 12,675.

The saplings were to be delivered at Bhillian village where Kirpal maintained an agricultural land.

He again booked 100 saplings for himself and his relative by depositing Rs 1,950.

He decided to get the saplings planted from the company and paid Rs 3,120 for it.

Kirpal further alleged that he immersed the saplings in water for 72 hours while waiting for the labour to arrive. The labour planted the saplings on January 24, 2006 and left after giving instructions to Kirpal.

He pointed out that after the saplings sprouted, he noticed that 60 per cent of them survived, while 40 per cent died.

The matter was brought to the notice of the company, which proposed to re-plant saplings in January, 2007.

The company admitted to the petitioner booking 650 saplings with them. But they denied supplying any defective or unhealthy saplings to Kirpal.

They further alleged that Kirpal had stopped watering the saplings as he wrote a letter to the company stating the same. The company averred that the letter stated that Kirpal thought watering the saplings was a sheer wastage of time.

The forum stated: “One full year was wasted by Kirpal Singh in growing the plants. If for that one year he had given the land on lease it would have earned him Rs 24,000 for three acres at Rs 8,000 per acre. We are therefore of the opinion that the complainant is entitled to recovering Rs 79,363.”