IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.18866 of 2010 Date of Decision: August 04, 2011 Jitender Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana & others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr.Surender Lamba, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. Bus bearing registration No.HR-19-2193 was intercepted while proceeding from Charkhi Dadri to Mathura on 2.4.1992 by the Flying Squad. On suspicion, tickets of denomination of ` 9/- were taken from the Conductor alongwith way bill and also from the passengers. The matter was reported to the General Manager. Written complaint was also filed before Station House Officer, Police Station, Charkhi Dadri for registering a case against accused Nafe Singh. Accordingly, FIR No.116 dated 2.4.1992, under Sections 406, 420, 468 and 471 IPC was registered against Nafe Singh. Matter was investigated. The petitioner was cited as a witness. Only Nafe Singh was charge-sheeted by the court, whereas other persons were discharged by the trial Court. The petitioner, who was cited as a witness, appeared and gave evidence. It was found that evidence of the petitioner given before the court led to acquittal of the accused, though tickets worth ` 61,200/- were recovered by the police from the custody of Nafe Singh, which were found to be Civil Writ Petition No.18866 of 2010 : 2 : bogus. For this, memorandum of charges was issued to the petitioner and after holding proper enquiry, the petitioner was awarded a punishment of reversion to the lowest of the previous scale (scale on step below the present scale). The petitioner accordingly has challenged this decision after having been unsuccessful in appeal and revision against this order. The whole line of submission made by the counsel for the petitioner is that it was fault of the investigation that led to the acquittal. Acquittal of Nafe Singh is nowhere related to the statement, which the petitioner had made before the trial Court. This is nothing but a writ to seek appreciation of the evidence in regard to the guilt or otherwise of the petitioner. The writ court has limited jurisdiction to interfere in disciplinary matters. If there is a jurisdictional error or procedural error, which had led to some punishment, the same can be gone into by the writ court. The courts do not interfere in decision but the decision making process. Still, to satisfy myself, I have got on record the statement made by the petitioner before the trial court. The vague nature of statement is more aimed at avoidance, rather than disclosing the relevant facts. This can be clearly noticed. Thus, no cause for interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction is made out. The writ petition is dismissed. August 04, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE