IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
Civil Writ Petition No. 11574 of 2009
DATE OF DECISION : AUGUST 26, 2009
SUKHDEV SINGH & ORS.
....... PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.
.... RESPONDENT(S)
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA
PRESENT: Mr. Harinder Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).
Mr. BS Chahal, DAG, Punjab.
AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral)
The petitioners, 7 in number, have filed this petition under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in
the nature of certiorari quashing order dated 30.5.2008 (Annexure P-7)
under which the cases of the petitioners for their promotion as Lecturers
(School Cadre) have been rejected on the ground that annual results of the
petitioners for the last 5 years have fallen below 50%.
It has been pleaded on behalf of the petitioners that the denial
of promotion on the ground given by the respondents in the impugned order
Civil Writ Petition No. 11574 of 2009 2
dated 30.5.2008 (Anenxure P-7) is against the provisions of the Punjab
State Education Service Class-III (Service Cadre) Service Rules, 1978.
Reply on behalf of respondent No.1 has been filed by way of
affidavit of Shri Gurinder Singh Grewal, IAS, Secretary to Government of
Punjab, Department of School Education, Chandigarh, in Court today,
which is taken on record.
In the reply, it has been given out that instructions dated
9.6.2005 providing for 50% positive results, for promotion to the post of
Lecturers, being contrary to the provisions of the Punjab State Education
Service Class-III (Service Cadre) Service Rules, 1978, it has been decided
to review all the cases of the employees who have been denied promotion
to the posts of Lecturers on this account. In this view of the matter, the
case of the petitioners would be considered, in accordance with the new
instructions dated 21.8.2009, copy whereof has been placed on record as
Annexure R-1.
In view of the above, this petition is disposed of.
The respondents are directed to consider the cases of the
petitioners for promotion with effect from the date the juniors of the
petitioners have been promoted. The petitioners will also be entitled to all
consequential benefits.
August 26, 2009 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?