HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.16083 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.09.2011 **** Bhajan Singh . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab & Ors. . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 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. Surmukh Singh, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, DAG Punjab ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner was working as Inspector Gr-I in the Food and Civil Supplies Department, Government. He retired from the service w.e.f. 30.06.2006. It appears that, while in service, he was charge-sheeted and an enquiry report dated 04.07.2007 (Annexure P3) exonerating him of the charges was submitted. As no decision was taken in the enquiry report, a part of the Gratuity and the retiral benefits was allegedly withheld. He approached this Court seeking a direction for conclusion of the departmental action pursuant to the said enquiry report dated 04.07.2007. (2). Learned State counsel, on the other hand, submits that the besides the above-stated report, there was another enquiry CWP No.16083 of 2009.doc - 2 – report submitted against the petitioner in which he was presumably held guilty. (3). Having heard learned counsel for the parties at some length, I am of the considered view that whatever may be the outcome of the enquiry held against the petitioner, it is imperative upon the disciplinary authority to conclude the disciplinary action in a time-bound manner. Suffice it to mention here that in case the petitioner is found guilty and some penal action is to be taken against him the same would obviously be without prejudice to the legal rights of the petitioner to challenge such action of the authority. (4). The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondents to conclude the disciplinary action, if any, pending against the petitioner within a period three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (5). In case the petitioner is not found guilty of any misconduct, the withheld amount of Gratuity and/or monetary benefits shall be released within a period of one month of such decision failing which the petitioner shall be entitled to interest @ 7% per annum. However, in case the petitioner is held guilty, the law shall take its own course. The petitioner, however, in that event shall be at liberty to 2 CWP No.16083 of 2009.doc - 3 – challenge the penal action of the respondents before an appropriate forum. (6). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 20.09.2011 vishal shonkar (SURYA KANT) Judge 3