IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 8606 of 2011 Date of decision : 07.12.2012 Sadhana .....Petitioner VERSUS Vice Chancellor, Bhagat Phool Singh Mahila Vishawavidyalya and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Kuldeep Khandelwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Tribhuvan Dahiya, Advocate for respondents No. 1 to 4 **** RANJIT SINGH, J. The only prayer made in the present petition is that the detailed marks sheet has not been supplied to the petitioner. The reply has been filed giving reason and disclosing the fact that detailed marks sheet had been lying unclaimed in the Law Department. It is stated that now the detailed marks sheet has been collected by the petitioner. At this stage, counsel for the petitioner pleads that petitioner has lost one year because of delay in releasing of detailed marks sheet. I do not see any reason for loosing one year only for supply of detailed marks sheet. There is also no culpable negligence seen in this case merely in supply of detailed marks sheet which is called for any award of any compensation. The writ petition, therefore, is rendered infructuous and is disposed of as such. December 07, 2012 ( RANJIT SINGH ) reena JUDGE