IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 989 of 2007
Date of Decision: 21.1.2009
Kewal Krishan ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others .....Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA
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?
Present: Shri Inderjeet Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Shri Amol Rattan Singh, Additional AG, Punjab.
T.S. Thakur, C.J. (Oral).
The only prayer made in this petition filed in public interest is
for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to take disciplinary action
against respondent No.5, who is said to be working as a press reporter for
certain newspapers in Punjab, even when he is a full time School Teacher in
the service of the State Education Deptt. The petitioner has placed on record
copies of letter dated 24.10.2007 addressed by the Deputy Chief Election
Officer, Punjab to the Secretary, Department of Education, Punjab and letter
dated 11.2.2007 addressed by the District Election Officer, Bathinda, to the
Director, Public Instruction(s), Punjab, Chandigarh, apart from a
representation (Annexure P.6) dated 27.6.2008 addressed by the petitioner
to the Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Punjab, and the
Director, Public Instruction(s), Punjab, pointing out that respondent No.5 is
CWP No. 989 of 2007 ( 2)
working as a press reporter in different newspapers published from Punjab
and thereby committing misconduct for which he needs to be proceeded
against. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the representation
made to them, as also the letters received by the Secretary, Department of
Education, Punjab and the Director, Public Instruction(s), Punjab, from
different offices, pointing out the acts of misconduct and indiscipline on the
part of respondent No.5, no action has been taken against the said
respondent so far.
Shri Amol Rattan Singh, who has accepted notice on behalf of
respondents No. 1 to 4, submits that given some time, the Secretary,
Department of Education, Govt. of Punjab, Chandigarh, shall take notice of
the representation and the communications addressed by the officers
mentioned above and examine the matter at his level and take whatever
action is called for in the facts and circumstances of the case against the
alleged misconduct of respondent No. 5. He submits that the writ petition
could be, with suitable directions, disposed of, as there is no room for any
further directions in the matter. There is merit in that contention. We do not,
for the present, propose to go into the question whether or not there is
indeed any misconduct on the part of respondent No.5 nor do we propose to
go into the question as to what action can be taken against him. In our
opinion, both these issues can be left to be determined by the Secretary,
Department of Education, Punjab, or by the authority competent to take
action against respondent No.5, in accordance with the Service Rules.
We, accordingly, dispose of this petition with the direction that
the Secretary, Department of Education, Punjab, shall look into the
representation and the communications referred to in the writ petition and
CWP No. 989 of 2007 ( 3)
take appropriate action in case the allegation regarding misconduct by
respondent No.5 is proved, in accordance with law. The needful shall be
done expeditiously, but not later than six months from the date a copy of
this order is received by the Secretary, Department of Education,
Government of Punjab. No costs.
(T.S. THAKUR)
CHIEF JUSTICE
(HEMANT GUPTA)
JUDGE
21-01-2009
ds