C.W.P. No.6085 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.6085 of 2010 Date of Decision.26.05.2010 Loveleen Singh S/o Mohinder Singh ........Petitioner Versus Union of India through the Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi and another ....Respondents Present: Mr. Navkiran Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. N.P.K. Singh, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. Manohar Lall, Addl. A.G., Punjab for respondent No.3. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 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? -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The writ petition is for a direction for issuance of a passport. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out to the fact that from the affidavit filed on behalf of the 3rd respondent, it bears out that there is no adverse report by the police at present. If the passport has not been issued only awaiting the police report, the 1st respondent shall issue the passport in the light of the report given by the Superintendent of Police. If the passport, however, has not been issued for any other reason, the same be considered and appropriate orders be passed and conveyed to the petitioner within C.W.P. No.6085 of 2010 -2- two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Union states that the report of the police has not been received while Sh. Manohar Lall appearing on behalf of the State states that he has served the same. The copy which has been produced before the Court will be taken by the counsel appearing for the Union as the report of the police Officer and transmitted to the Passport Officer for appropriate decision in the light of what is stated above. 3. The writ petition is disposed of. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE May 26, 2010 Pankaj*