IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.13724 OF 2009 DATE OF DECISION: AUGUST 13, 2010 Ram Kishan .....Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana 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. Sushil Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana, for the State. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. (ORAL) Despite repeated opportunities, no reply has been filed in this case. The petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking limited relief to the effect that he has filed an appeal against the order, directing recovery from him. When the appeal was not being decided for a period of over five years, he had filed the present writ petition, seeking direction for the respondents to decide the appeal. Irony is that the petitioner, in the meantime, has also retired. Still, no action has been taken to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner. Even no reply has been filed despite repeated opportunities, though notice CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.13724 OF 2009 :{ 2 }: had been issued since 3.9.2009. The reply having not been filed despite various opportunities, the State will loose right to file reply. The defence of the State is, thus, struck off. The necessary consequence would be that the averments made in the petition would be taken to be correct for the purpose of passing the order. The present writ petition is accordingly allowed. Direction is hereby issued to the respondents to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If the appeal is not decided within the stipulated period, the recovery of the amount shall remain stayed. August 13, 2010 ( RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE