IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.9032 of 2011 Subhash Chand ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana & others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr.Sanjay Verma, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioner is serving in Police Department and claims to be having satisfactory service. He was served with a charge sheet on 13.1.2011 with the allegation that one FIR for theft of Scooter belonging to Sunil Kumar was not registered by him. The petitioner submitted his reply and Enquiry Officer was appointed to hold enquiry. The Enquiry Officer submitted report holding the petitioner guilty. Thereafter the petitioner was served with a show cause notice and has been imposed a punishment of stoppage of one increment with future effect. The appeal filed by the petitioner was rejected. He has accordingly approached this court to impugn this punishment. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the Enquiry Officer as well as punishing authority have not appreciated the facts correctly as the petitioner had written the application on the same date the complaint was made, which fact has not been rightly appreciated by the authorities. I am afraid, appreciation of evidence, would be beyond the jurisdiction of this court. No other legal infirmity is pointed out, for which the court could have validly interfered in the order imposing this punishment. No case for exercise of writ jurisdiction, therefore, is made out. Dismissed. July 19, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE