IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.9008 of 2010 Date of Decision : May 17, 2010. Veena .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Virinder Kumar Shukla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.K.S.Sidhu, DAG, Punjab. -.- 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? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Mr.K.S.Sidhu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. In view of the nature of the order which I propose to pass, there is no necessity to seek any counter-reply from the respondents at this stage. The petitioner is serving as a Math Mistress in the Education Department, Government of Punjab. According to her, she was proceeded on leave w.e.f. 8.2.2010 as she was advised bed-rest due to acute lower back pain. The petitioner had to remain on bed-rest for an extended period C.W.P.No .9008 of 2010 2 firstly from 8.3.2010 to 7.4.2010 and then from 9.4.2010 to 5.5.2010. She, thereafter submitted her joining report on 5.5.2010. According to the petitioner, she has not been permitted to join the duties. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of relief sought in this writ petition, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the same with a direction to respondent Nos. 3 & 4 that in case the petitioner has not been placed under suspension so far, she may be permitted to join her duties forthwith, however without prejudice to the rights of the Competent Authority to take action against her for the misconduct of her alleged absence from duty. It is made clear that by permitting the petitioner to join the duties, the misconduct alleged against her cannot be treated to have been condoned. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. May 17, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE