IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No.118 of 2010 Date of Decision: 8.4.2010 Sunita ..Appellant versus Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary Education Department, Haryana and others. ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKUL MUDGAL, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present : Mr.R.S.Tacoria, Advocate for the appellant Mr.Narender Hooda, Advocate Mr.R.K.Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.3 ……… MUKUL MUDGAL, C.J. (Oral) 1. In the present LPA, order dated 4.11.2009, passed by a learned Single Judge has been impugned, dismissing the writ petition of the petitioner as not maintainable. 2. The petitioner (appellant herein) filed a writ of Quo Warranto for quashing the continuance of respondent No.3 as District Education Officer on the ground that she had been transferred and given the current duty charge of the post of Joint Director at Chandigarh vide order dated 19.2.2008 but she has not relinquished the post held by her at Rohtak and joined the transferred post. LPA No.118 of 2010 3. Learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable holding that though respondent No.3 has been transferred but the order of transfer has been held in abeyance and it is for the government to see and ensure implementation of the transfer order. It was further held that no justiciable right is seen which can be enforced through a writ Court. 4. During the course of the hearing of the present LPA, on 1.4.2010, with the consent of counsel for the parties, following order was passed:- “Without going into the merits of the controversy involved in this case, we are satisfied by the statement made by counsel for respondent No.3 that if extension of time is granted upto April 30, 2010, to his client to join the post of Deputy Director, i.e., the transfer post, then no further action is called for in the present appeal. He states that his client will file an affidavit to that effect on or before April 8, 2010. We make it clear that we have accepted this statement of counsel for respondent No.3 without going into the correctness of the allegations made in the writ petition against respondent No.3.” Pursuant to the said order, respondent No.3 has filed her affidavit, which is to the following effect:- “1. That the above named deponent is, at present, working as District Education Officer, Rohtak and is impleaded as respondent No.3 in the above noted LPA. 2. That the deponent due to family circumstance i.e. the illness and studies of her only son, could not join as Deputy Director at Chandigarh against the vacant post of Joint Director and on the representation of the deponent the competent authority deferred the joining of the deponent on the transferred post till further order. Now, the deponent undertake to join on the transferred post i.e. the post of Deputy Director against the vacant post of Joint Director in the office of Commissioner- cum-Director General, Education Department, Haryana at Chandigarh on or before 30.4.2010.” 5. With the filing of the aforesaid affidavit, the primary grievance of the appellant appears to have been satisfied. While taking note of the undertaking, we direct respondent No.3 to comply with the said undertaking 2 LPA No.118 of 2010 within the stipulated time and make it clear that no further extension shall be sought for or granted. 6. With the aforesaid observations, this appeal is disposed of as infructuous. 7. At this stage, counsel for the appellant states that the appeal though has been disposed of as infructuous, certain omissions and commissions, which were committed by respondent No.3 regarding payment of alleged amounts detailed in the writ petition, should be looked into by the authorities in the public interest and for that purpose, he may be allowed to file a representation. We make it clear that it will be open for the appellant to make a representation to respondent No.1 in respect of such alleged transgression, who shall look into the same and pass appropriate orders. (MUKUL MUDGAL) CHIEF JUSTICE 08.04.2010 (JASBIR SINGH) gk JUDGE 3