IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civl Writ Petition No.17145 of 2011 Date of Decision : September 14, 2011. Ramandeep Kaur .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Ritesh Pandey, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 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? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner, soon after her recruitment as a Constable in the Punjab Police, has been served with a show cause notice dated 1.9.2011 (Annexure P-1) alleging that she got herself recruited through 'deceitful means' as she had failed to qualify the test of 'high jump' during the recruitment process. The petitioner in her reply dated 3.9.2011 (Annexure P-2) to the show cause notice, has specifically denied this allegation and has categorically averred that she qualified all the tests including the 'high jump'. The petitioner has now approached this Court apprehending that her services are likely to be terminated. CWP No.17145 of 2011 [2] Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the termination order has already been passed. It is also contended that the petitioner is ready and willing to re-appear in the 'high jump test' to prove her eligibility. Having regard to the categoric stand taken by the petitioner in her reply to the show cause notice and at the same time to enable the petitioner to challenge the order of termination, if any, passed by respondent No.3, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the operation of the impugned order, if any passed against the petitioner shall remain stayed for a period of one month from the date a copy thereof is supplied to the petitioner. Resultantly, the petitioner shall be allowed to undertake the ongoing trraining. The petitioner may, if so advised meanwhile, challenge the said order before an appropriate forum. Further, in case no such order is passed, respondent No.2 is directed to communicate the same to the petitioner in writing and in that event, this writ petition shall be treated to have been disposed of as pre-mature with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Court as and when required. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. September 14, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE