SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. - (1.) IN the present writ petition, the primarily grouse of the petitioner is against respondent No. 4, which is a private company and not an instrumentality of the State within Article 12 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) WE have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. In view of the aforesaid fact this writ petition is not maintainable as has already been held by this Court in CWP No. 19291 of 2011 titled Veena Kumari and another Vs. State of Punjab and others decided on 14.10.2011. Dismissed.;