LPA No. 303 of 1998 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. LPA No. 303 of 1998 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.02.2010 Lt. Co. S.S. Alhawat and another ....Appellants. Versus Rekha Dhankar and another ....Respondents. 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. R.K. Malik, Sr. Advocate with Mr. , Advocate for the appellants. ... Alok Singh, J. 1. Present Letters Patent Appeal is filed challenging the order of learned Single Judge dated 28.5.1998 whereby holding the appellant guilty of disobedience of the order passed by learned Additional District Judge as well as by learned Single Judge by not granting admission to the student in Class XI and not permitting her to appear in the examination despite the direction issued by the Court. Learned Single Judge directed the appellants to undergo simple civil imprisonment till rising of the Court and to pay fine of Rs.500/- each and in the event of non-payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one week. LPA No. 303 of 1998 2 2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff having passed matriculation examinations from Model School, Rohtak, was denied admission in Class XI. She filed a civil suit. In revision arising from the civil Court order, learned Single Judge directed the appellants i.e. Principal and Secretary to permit the plaintiff to appear in the examination subject to the final decision of the suit. It seems that the plaintiff was not allowed to appear in the examination. Although, the appellants i.e. Principal and Secretary of the school took the defence that plaintiff herself did not appear in the examination, however, after taking into consideration the material available on record, learned Single Judge found that the Principal and Secretary have violated the order of this Court by not permitting the plaintiff to appear in the examination and sentenced the appellants to undergo simple imprisonment till rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo imprisonment for one week. 3. Mr. Malik learned counsel for the appellants has stated that the fine imposed by learned Single Judge has already been paid. However, career of the appellants would be ruined, if sentence part is not set aside. He further argued that since no controversy remains to be resolved and the plaintiff is no more student of the school, hence part of the order to undergo imprisonment till rising of Court, should be set aside. 4. Undisputedly, the appellants are not in service of the school and the plaintiff is no more student of the school, hence nothing remains to be enforced. In view of this, we are of the view that the sentence imposed against the appellants to undergo simple imprisonment till rising of the court, seems to be unjustified. LPA No. 303 of 1998 3 5. In view of the fact that the appellants have already paid fine, we modify the order impugned to the extent order to undergo civil imprisonment till rising of the court, is set aside. 6. Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. ( Alok Singh ) Judge ( Adarsh Kumar Goel ) Judge 26.02.2010 sk.