IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.1807 of 2010 Date of decision : 19.5.2011 Kamlesh Bansal ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana & others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr.Vivek Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Harish Rathee, Sr.Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr.H.N.Khanduja, Advocate for respondents No.3 and 4. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. The petitioner in this writ petition prays for grant of commuted leave on full pay on medical ground for 108 days from 15.7.2004 to 30.10.2004, which, according to her, was sanctioned vide Annexure P-2, but due to certain interpolation made by respondent No.3 the said document was changed and instead a document Annexure P-4 was created to deny her the claim. The respondent-State filed reply and have questioned the bona fides of the petitioner and have rather stated that the entire claim is fabricated as they had written to the doctor in United States where the petitioner was undergoing treatment , but the letter has been returned back with the comment that no such address and no C.W.P.No.1807 of 2010 -2- such street exists. They have also doubted the veracity of the certificate produced by the petitioner particularly when the petitioner has claimed that she suffered a fracture due to a slip in the aeroplane whereas the certificate indicates that she had merely sprained her ankle On due consideration of the matter, I am of the opinion that the claim of the petitioner cannot be answered while exercising jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for the reason that it raises a disputed question of fact. The veracity of the claim of the petitioner being based on certain documents which are seriously disputed by the respondents cannot be ascertained in the exercise of such powers. Consequently, the petition is held to be without any merit and is dismissed. 19.5.2011 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss