S.S.Nijjar, J.

1. Hoping for a change in the attitude of the concerned officers of the State of Punjab, on 17.9.2004, when this matter came up for motion hearing, we passed the following order:-

"Mr. Behl has very fairly stated that the respondents have already lost the matter up to the Supreme Court. He, however, states that an application for review has been filed in the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP No. 4792 of 2003 decided on May 6, 2003. The petitioner was appointed as Peon on June 6, 1997. His services were abruptly terminated on 23.7.1999. The petitioner was directed to be reinstated by the Labour Court on 21.5.2002. This award was challenged by the State of Punjab in CWP No. 4792 of 2003, which was dismissed by this Court on May 6, 2003. Not being satisfied, the State of Punjab filed SLP in the Supreme Court which has been dismissed on 31.1.2004. In such circumstances, we are of the prima facie view that the attitude adopted by the State of Punjab, in the present case, apart from being unreasonable borders on vindictiveness. In such circumstances, Mr. Behl is fully justified in stating before this Court that he will request the department to reconsider the