IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.14711 of 2010 R.S.Dahiya Vs. The State of Haryana & others Present: Mr.S.K.Garg Narwana, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioner has challenged the issuance of charge- sheet to him on the ground that this charge-sheet is factually incorrect. Further grievance is that the petitioner is due to retire and this charge-sheet has been issued with an aim and purpose to make him retire in the present rank. The junior to the petitioner has since been promoted. The counsel contends that Engineer-in-Chief is not forwarding the comments to the authorities as he is well aware that this case is un-defendable. May be it is so. It can be otherwise also. The question to be seen is whether this court has any jurisdiction to interfere in the issuance of charge-sheet on the ground that this is factually incorrect. The plea in this regard is required to be made before the competent authority, which will decide the same. The submission that the petitioner would retire before being considered for promotion would also not mean much as his right to seek promotion would continue even after the decision in the charge-sheet from the date his junior has been promoted. Thus, no case for interference in the charge-sheet at this stage is made out. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. August 18, 2010 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE