LPA No. 179 of 2009 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. LPA No. 179 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.02.2010 Saroj Bishnoi ....Appellants. Versus State of Haryana and another ....Respondent. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh 1.Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgement ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr. J.S. Manipur, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. R.D. Sharma, DAG, Haryana ... Alok Singh, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. Undisputedly, the petitioner joined as Lecturer in Government College, kalka on 8.8.1984. Undisputedly, the petitioner was diagnosed suffering from prolapsed disc (ACPIVD) by the doctor with advice to avoid forward bending, lifting weight, frequent travelling and climbing stairs. The petitioner was transferred as Assistant Director (Colleges) at Chandigarh and her office was at third floor of the building. 3. The petitioner filed CWP No.12457 of 2006, challenging her LPA No. 179 of 2009 2 transfer to Chandigarh. During the tendency of the writ petition, the petitioner moved an application dated 14.8.2006 requesting the authorities to permit her to work at Panchkula on medical grounds or alternatively, she may be allowed to proceed on leave on medical grounds. On 29.8.2006, a Division Bench of this Court in CWP 12457 of 2006 directed the competent authority that in case the petitioner applies for leave, then her leave be sanctioned, in accordance with law. Ultimately, the writ petition was allowed on 9.1.2007 and the petitioner’s transfer to Panchkula was quashed. 4. The petitioner applied for medical leave from 8.8.2006 to 13.2.2007, which was declined by the respondents and extra-ordinary leave for the same period was granted to the petitioner. 5. The only ground taken before us is when this Court directed the respondents to either post the petitioner at Panchkula or to grant her medical leave on the basis of medical certificate produced by her, hence thereafter, it was not open for the respondents to refuse medical leave saying the petitioner has not produced medical certificate suggesting her complete bed rest. 6. Undisputedly, the petitioner was diagnosed suffering from prolapsed disc (ACPIVD) and was advised to avoid forward bending, lifting weight, frequent travelling, climbing stairs and serious activities. Undisputedly, her office in Chandigarh was at third floor. She had to climb stairs which was against medical advice and as per the direction given by this Court vide order dated 29.8.2006 in CWP No.12457 of 2006, the petitioner was granted medical leave. Hence in our opinion, now refusing medical leave to the petitioner on the ground that she has not been advised LPA No. 179 of 2009 3 bed rest, is not sustainable. 7. In view of the fact that the petitioner was advised not to climb stairs and avoid forward bending, hence the petitioner could have not joined duties at Chandigarh and had to seek medical leave and this seems to be justified ground for medical leave. 8. In view of the above, we direct the competent authority to reconsider the matter in the light of the observations made hereinabove. 9. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. ( Alok Singh ) Judge ( Adarsh Kumar Goel ) Judge 26.02.2010 sk.