High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCOCP/2558/2016dismissed

Gautam Puri v. Parveen Kumar Thind & Another

2017-01-31Mr. Justice Dr. Bharat Bhushan Parsoon2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH COCP-2558-2016 (O & M) Date of decision: 31.01.2017 Gautam Puri .... Petitioners V/s Parveen Kumar Thind and anr.

...Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA

Present:

Mr. M.S. Rana, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. V. Ramswaroop, Addl.A.G., Punjab.

Mr. Baljinder Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.2. **** Rajan Gupta, J. (Oral) Learned State counsel submits that order passed by the writ court has been complied with. He has referred to Para 3 and 4 of the affidavit dated January 16, 2017, which read as under:- "3. That the above noted writ petition was disposed of by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 14.03.2016 (Annexure P-1) with the direction to respondents no.2 and 3 to consider the alleged enquiry report said to have been submitted by respondent no.5 and to decide the pending matter by taking it to a logical conclusion in accordance with law preferably within four months from the date of the receipt of a certified copy of the order.

That in this context it is submitted that in compliance to the directions issued by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 14.03.2016, the enquiry report submitted by the respondent No.5 has been considered and four employees namely Sh. Baljit Singh (Executive Officer), Sh. Karam Singh (Assistant Sukhpreet Kaur 2017.02.02 11:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

COCP-2558-2016 (O & M) ::2::

Municipal Engineer), Sh. Santokh Singh (Accountant) and Sh. Satnam Singh (Clerk), Nagar Panchayat, Shahkot, have been issued Charge sheets under Rule 8 of the Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1970, vide Memorandums dated 16.12.2016. Further action would be taken after the receipt of that respective reports to their charge sheets." Mr. Baljinder Singh, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of respondents No.2 and submits that he adopts the same stand as taken by the State.

In view of the above, no cause of action survives in this petition. Same is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. (RAJAN GUPTA) January 31, 2017 JUDGE sukhpreet Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Sukhpreet Kaur 2017.02.02 11:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document