IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 3084 of 2009 Date of Decision: 2.3.2009 Jagdish Singh ---Petitioner Vs. Punjab & Haryana High Court through Registrar ---Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. Gourav Bhaiya, Advocate for the petitioner. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) The petitioner has challenged the order dated 15.11.2008 passed by the District & Sessions Judge, Jalandhar appointing the Enquiry Officer for holding enquiry into the charges against the petitioner for which the charge sheet already stands served. The grievance of the petitioner is that the enquiry has been ordered in terms of paragraph 5-b of Rule 8 of Punjab Civil Services (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1970 read with Rule 12 (2) of Punjab Court Establishment Recruitment and general conditions of service Rules, 1997. According to the petitioner he has filed the reply and that Rule 5 (b) is not attracted. I have perused the Rule 8 contained in para 4 of the aforesaid rules. Rule 5 (b) deals with the case, where no written statement to the charge sheet is filed, however, Rule 5(a) clearly covers the case of the petitioner, where the reply to the written statement is filed and the disciplinary authority has the right to hold enquiry on consideration of the written statement, if the authority is not satisfied with the reply. In the CWP No. 3084 of 2009 -2- impugned order, no reference is made to the reply filed by the petitioner. In view of the above circumstances, the impugned order is hereby set aside, however, the disciplinary authority i.e. District & Sessions Judge, Jalandhar is hereby directed to pass a fresh order keeping in view the reply submitted by the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of Rule 8 sub Rule 5(a) within a period of four weeks. Disposed of as such. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 2.3.2009 lucky