IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.21485 of 2008 Date of Decision: September 28, 2010 Charan Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Gurcharan Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for respondent Nos.1 to 6. Mr. Ashok Giri, Advocate, for respondent No.7. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing Orders dated 8.8.2008 (Annexure P-10); 20.11.2008 (Annexure P-13); and 12.12.2008 (Annexure P-15). 2. Perusal of Order dated 8.8.2008 (Annexure P-10) indicates that the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Nawanshahar, conducted enquiry and CWP No.21485 of 2008 [2] filed a report before the Deputy Commissioner, Nawanshahar, with a finding that stern action be taken against the petitioner who had been officiating as Principal, Government Girls Senior Secondary School, Balachaur. The petitioner is alleged to have abused his position as officiating Principal by way of not giving benefit to complainant, Paramjit Kaur, of studying in the village school for her selection. Accordingly, career of the complainant had been spoiled. 3. Order dated 20.11.2008 (Annexure P-13) has been passed by the Director General School Education, Punjab to the effect that departmental enquiry proceedings are required to be initiated against the petitioner as he had harassed the complainant as noticed above. Vide Order dated 12.12.2008 (Annexure P-15), drawing & disbursing powers have been withdrawn with immediate effect from the petitioner. 4. Subsequent development has taken place, in so much as, the petitioner is no more officiating Principal and therefore, there is no question of the petitioner having drawing & disbursing powers. In such circumstances, qua order dated 12.12.2008 (Annexure P-15), the matter has been rendered infructuous and no CWP No.21485 of 2008 [3] orders directing the respondents to entrust drawing & disbursing powers to the petitioner can be passed. 5. So far as, enquiry report (Annexure P-10) is concerned, I am of the view that in extraordinary writ jurisdiction, the facts cannot be re-appreciated to come to a different conclusion. Order dated 20.11.2008 (Annexure P-13) only orders departmental enquiry against the petitioner. I am of the considered view that the respondents cannot be stopped from holding departmental enquiry against an erring public servant. 6. In view of the above, no ground for invoking extraordinary writ jurisdiction is made out. 7. The petition is dismissed. (AJAI LAMBA) September 28, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?