COCP No.1143 of 2006 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.1143 of 2006 Date of decision: October 30, 2006. Darshana Kumari & Ors. ...Petitioner(s) v. Shri R.S. Gujral, IAS & Anr. ...Respondent(s) Present: Ms. Alka Chatrath, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri R.D. Sharma, Dy. Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent. Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioners filed CWP No.1834 of 2005 which was disposed of on 30.8.2005 in the same terms as CWP No.20066 of 2004 (Krishan Kumar & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors), decided on 30.8.2005. In the latter writ petition, the Secretary, Govt. of Haryana, Education Department was directed by this Court to hold an inquiry himself or through a delegatee of his choice, not below the rank of Joint Secretary into the allegations made by the petitioners in respect of the selections to the posts of SS Masters/Mistresses. The inquiry officer was asked by the court to complete the entire proceedings within a period of four months. Alleging non-compliance of the above said order, this contempt petition has been filed. On September 5, 2006, Learned State Counsel was asked to seek instructions in the matter. Pursuant thereto, he has filed an affidavit dated 27.10.2006 of Mr. R.S. Gujral, IAS, Financial Commissioner and COCP No.1143 of 2006 -: 2 :- Principal Secretary to Govt. Haryana, Education Department, which is taken on record. As per the averments made in the affidavit, the inquiry was entrusted to the Commissioner and Director General School Education, Haryana, who, after giving appropriate opportunity to both the parties, is stated to have furnished an inquiry report in terms whereof the allegations made by the petitioners could not be substantiated. A communication to this effect also appears to have been sent on 4.10.2006 by the respondent to the candidates, like petitioner No.1, and a copy thereof has been appended as Annexure R-1. In the said letter, it has also been mentioned that “the report of the inquiry officer can be seen/obtained from the officer of Commissioner and Director General, School Education, Haryana, Chandigarh on any working day”. Though, it is not disputed by Learned Counsel for the petitioners that the directions issued by this court have since been complied with, she, however, apprehends that if the petitioners would apply for getting a copy of the inquiry report, the authorities may take unreasonable time to supply the same. After hearing Learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.1 as well as the Commissioner and Director General, School Education, Haryana that if the petitioners apply for a copy of the inquiry report, the same shall be supplied to them, however, at their expenses, within a period of two weeks they apply for. Disposed of. Rule discharged. October 30, 2006. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge