- (1.) This order will dispose of Civil Revision No. 2597 of 1988 and Civil Revision No. 301 of 1989.
(2.) Brief facts : Respondent No. 1/plaintiff filed a suit against respondent/defendant No. 1 and defendant No. 2/petitioner for declaration to the effect that defendant No. 2/petitioner is not entitled to be selected and promoted under the Merit Promotion Scheme. The plaintiff alone is entitled to be selected and promoted under the Merit Promotion Scheme. Alongwith the suit, an application under order 39 rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was filed. The same was disposed of by the Additional District Judge, Patiala with the observations that the plaintiff and defendant No. 2 be considered for promotion against the post of Reader under the Merit Promotion Scheme. Defendant No. 2 was selected while claim of the plaintiff was rejected. After the selection by the Selection Committee was announced, defendant No. 2 moved an application before the trial Judge that the suit of the plaintiff be dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. The plaintiff moved an application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for amending the plaint to challenge the selection of defendant No. 2 as Reader. The application for amendment of the plaint was allowed and this has given rise to Civil Revision No. 2579 of 1988. The application by defendant No. 2 for dismissing the suit as having been rendered infructuous, was declined by the Subordinate Judge in view of the order passed on the application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure and this order has given rise to Civil Revision No. 301 of 1989.
(3.) I have gone through the order passed by the learned trial Judge on the application for amendment of the plaint. I find no illegality or infirmity therein committed by the trial Judge and none could reasonably be pointed out. I do not find any scope for interference with this order. Accordingly, the Civil Revision No. 2579 of 1988 challenging the said order is dismissed. In view of the judgment in Civil Revision No. 2579 of 1988, the Civil Revision No. 301 of 1988 is also dismissed. However, learned trial Judge is directed to dispose of the suit expeditiously.;