IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.960 of 2009 Date of Decision: January 21, 2009 Pooram Chandra Karnatak .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS Food Corporation of India & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Ms. Sangita Dhanda, Advocate, for the petitioner. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has a very good case to succeed in statutory appeal in so much as the enquiry of officer exonerated the petitioner and held him not guilty while recording a finding that he was absent during the relevant period. The petitioner had not taken charge of the stock. Despite such findings, the punishing authority has imposed punishment on the petitioner. The petitioner exercised his right to appeal and filed an appeal which however has been pending for three months before respondent No.2 i.e. Executive Director, earlier known as Zonal Manager (North), FCI, Zonal Office, Noida. Learned counsel for the petitioner CWP No.960 of 2009 [2] contends that the petitioner would be reaching the age of superannuation in March 2010. In case the appeal is decided against the petitioner, he would like to exercise other remedies, however, during the period in service. The controversy being confined to the appeal having been filed which has not been decided, the petition is disposed of without notice to the respondents with direction to respondent No.2 i.e. Executive Director, to deal with the appeal and take a decision thereon within 60 days of receipt of a copy of this order. (AJAI LAMBA) January 21, 2009 JUDGE avin