IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 20946 of 2008 Date of Decision: 18.12.2008 Isham Singh ..Petitioner versus State of Haryana and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.THAKUR,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. Hakesh Manuja, Advocate for the petitioner ***** T.S.Thakur, C.J. (Oral) Issue notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 4 only in the first instance.Keeping in view the nature of the order that we propose to make, we consider it unnecessary to issue notice to respondent No.5 Mr. Rameshwar Malik, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4. With the consent of counsel for the parties, this petition is being heard and finally disposed of. The only grievance made in public interest in this writ petition is against the alleged failure of respondent no.2 to take action against respondent No.5 on the basis of a report made by Block Education Officer, Nilokheri in the district Karnal. The petitioner's case is that although the said report finds fault with the certain action taken by respondent No.5, the CWP No. 20946 of 2008 [2] Enquiry report Annexure P-3 has not been examined by the higher officers nor any final decision taken as regard the action that needs to be taken on the basis of the same. Mr. Malik submits and in our opinion rightly so that there is no use keeping the petition pending on our board and the same can be disposed of with a direction that Director, Higher Education, Haryana, shall look into the matter and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. In the circumstances, therefore, all that we need say is that Director, Higher Education, Government of Haryana, shall look into the matter including the report submitted by Block Education Officer, Nilokheri, and take whatever action may be considered just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case strictly in accordance with law. We make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion about the correctness of the allegations made against respondent No.5 nor about the correctness of the findings which the Block Education Officer has recorded in his report Annexure P-3 to this petition. We are also not expressing any opinion as to whether and as to what disciplinary action ought to be taken against respondent No.5. All these issues and aspects shall be examined by the Director, who shall take a final decision expeditiously but not later than four months from today. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. Copy of the order be given dasti to Mr. Malik, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana under the signature of Bench Secretary. (T.S.THAKUR) CHIEF JUSTICE (JASBIR SINGH) JUDGE 18.12.2008 'ravinder'