IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 6341 of 2009(O&M) Date of Decision: 28.4.2009. Janak Raj --Petitioner Versus State of Punjab & others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. Girish Agnihotri, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Vinayjeet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) Notice of motion. Mr. B.S. Chahal, DAG, Punjab has been asked to accept notice on behalf of respondents-State. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is disposed of at the motion stage itself. The petitioner was appointed as Drug Inspector vide appointment letter dated 16.10.2007 on the recommendation of the Punjab Public Service Commission. It is alleged that the petitioner joined on 22.10.2007. After joining he was deputed for a training at Headquarter, Chandigarh. He successfully completed the said training course and after completion of training course he was notified as a Drug Inspector as per provisions of Drug and Cosmatics Act, 1940 and also as Assistant Public Prosecutor under Section 25 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The petitioner was thereafter transferred at Mansa vide order dated 12.12.2007. He joined at Mansa on 14.12.2007 and remained posted there till 29.12.2008. It is alleged that the petitioner performed his duties in CWP. No. 6341 of 2009(O&M) -2- accordance with law all along. He proceeded on sanctioned leave w.e.f 25.12.2008. In the meantime the petitioner was arrested on 29.12.008 by the Vigilance Department in a raid conducted by them and thereafter the petitioner has not been allowed to join the duties. The petitioner is on bail since 9.1.2009. The grievance of the petitioner is that even though, he is a regularly appointed Drug Inspector but the respondents are not permitting him to perform his duties and the petitioner has already made representation dated 16.2.2009 (Annexure P-4) but no decision has been take thereon till date. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will be satisfied, if, respondents are directed to take decision on the representation of the petitioner. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no.1 to take decision on the representation of the petitioner within a period of two months from the date certified copy of this order is served upon the competent authority. In the event the claim of the petitioner is to be rejected on any valid ground, the same shall be by a reasoned and speaking order. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 28.4.2009 lucky