CWP(T) No.16409/2008 25.05.2011 Present: Mr. Ranjan Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. A.G for the State Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, Advocate, for respondent No.4 Serious disputed questions of facts with regard to separation of the family of private respondent are raised in this petition. According to the private respondent, his family stood separated and, as such, he does not entail any disqualification due to the alleged employment of his father. According to Mr. Sharma, separation is in violation of the relevant Rules, which fact is seriously disputed by Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the private respondent. However, learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that the issue can be resolved by sending the matter to respondent No.3A, Tehsildar, Shahpur for inquiry and then for further consequential action. 2. Petitioner essentially is challenging the appointment of private respondent No.4 on the ground that family is joint. Respondent No.3A shall verify the factual matrix and submit his report to the competent authority who shall thereafter take action thereupon. Report shall positively be submitted before the authority within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order, which shall be supplied by the State. The competent authority shall thereafter decide the petitioner’s contentions, after adducing an opportunity of hearing/representation to all concerned within a period of two months there from. All consequential actions shall also be taken by the competent authority. Needless to add, the authority shall pass a reasoned order which shall be communicated to the parties. Petition stands disposed off. Copy dasti. ( Sanjay Karol ), Judge. May 25, 2011 (rana)