COCP No.643 of 2010 (O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.643 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 24.8.2010 Virender Redhu .....Petitioner Versus Rajan Gupta and another .….Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA 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: Shri Jagdeep Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri Aman Chaudhary, Additional AG, Haryana. Hemant Gupta, J. (Oral) The writ petition filed by the petitioner claiming promotion to the post of Math Master, was disposed of on 5.3.2009. The Court has considered the fact that the recruitment of the petitioner is under investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation and it was held that if the original appointment of the petitioner as JBT teacher is ultimately found to be not tainted, the respondents will consider his case for promotion within three months from the date of finalization of the finding that the appointment of the petitioner is not tainted. The petitioner filed Special Leave Petition Nos. 11106- 11107 of 2009, which was withdrawn vide order Annexure dated 21.8.2009 (Annexure R.III), after the Hon’ble Supreme Court considered an argument that the Central Bureau of Investigation is COCP No.643 of 2010 (O&M) [2] not seized of any matter pertaining to the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a review application before this Court, which was dismissed vide order dated 27.10.2009 (Annexure R.IV). This Court has noticed an argument that the petitioner’s appointment has not been challenged. It was found that the petitioner has not filed any replication controverting the stand of the respondents in the written statement nor any argument was raised during the course of argument when the order was passed. Aggrieved against the said order, the petitioners filed LPA No. 1460 of 2009, which was dismissed on 6.1.2010. After remaining unsuccessful in a review petition and in the Letters Patent Appeal, the petitioner has filed the present contempt petition alleging therein that the petitioner has not been promoted though the appointment of the petitioner is not subject matter of investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation. A perusal of the orders passed by the respondents show that a similar grievance raised by the petitioner remained unsuccessful in the review petition as also in the Letters Patent Appeal. Still further, learned counsel for the respondents has pointed out that a charge-sheet has been filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation, after the investigation was entrusted to it by the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Therefore, the proceedings in respect of appointment of the petitioner have not been concluded. In view of the said fact, I do not find that any case for initiation of the contempt proceedings is made out. Hence, the present petition is dismissed. [ HEMANT GUPTA ] JUDGE 24.8.2010 ds COCP No.643 of 2010 (O&M) [3]