IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civl Writ Petition No.8551 of 2011 Date of Decision : May 13, 2011. Vijay Kumari .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.H.S.Batth, 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 was appointed as Hindi Teacher with the respondent-Department on 27.1.1978 and her services were later on regularized vide order dated 12.8.1980. The petitioner applied for long leave w.e.f. 5.7.2006 and went abroad. It appears that she came back in December, 2008 and wanted to join her duties but has not been permitted. The petitioner represented the authorities and sent a legal notice dated 10.12.2010 (Annexure P-6). It appears that the respondents are treating the petitioner as absent from duty due to her over stay. The petitioner, on the other hand, seeks voluntary retirement also. CWP No.8551 of 2011 [2] In this scenario, it is imperative upon the respondents to take some decision as they cannot simply keep the representation/legal notice of the petitioner under the carpet. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to respondent Nos.2 & 3 to consider the claim of the petitioner as contained in the afore-mentioned legal notice and dispose of the same by passing a speaking order within a period of four months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. May 13, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE