Pardeep Kumar And Another vs State Of Punjab And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 5676 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Pardeep Kumar And Another vs State Of Punjab And Another on 13 March, 2024

             CWP-5582-2024                           2024:PHHC:035730                              1

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                                              AT CHANDIGARH
             121
                                                                  CWP-5582-2024
                                                                  Date of decision: 13.03.2024

             Pardeep Kumar and another
                                                                                      ....Petitioners
                                                     Versus

             State of Punjab and another
                                                                                      ...Respondents

             CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY
                                                *****

Present : Mr. Jatinderpal Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

***** AMAN CHAUDHARY. J.

1. The prayer in the present Civil Writ Petition filed under Articles

226/227 of the Constitution of India, is to issue a writ in the nature of

mandamus, for directing the respondents to consider the case of petitioners for

promotion as Naib Tehsildar from the rank of Senior Assistant and further

directing the respondents to place on record the entire promotion proceedings

undertaken by them.

2. Learned counsel would submit that the petitioners are entitled for

promotion to the post of Naib Tehsildar in consonance with 'The Punjab Naib

Tehsildars (Group B) Service Rules, 2019', having requisite experience in

terms of the Rules and after clearing the Departmental Examination, their

names had figured at number 11 and 12 of the final seniority list, Annexure P-

4. The grievance of the petitioners is that the persons junior to them from serial

number 13 to 23 have been granted current duty charge while they have not. He

places reliance on the judgment of this Court passed in Shingara Chand and

others vs. Punjab Water Supply & Sewerage Board and others, 2000(2)

S.C.T. 195. In this regard, a representation dated 03.01.2024, Annexure P-10,

has been submitted to respondent No.2, which has yet not evoked any response.

integrity of this order/judgment

He thus, at this stage, on instructions, submits that the petitioners are sanguine

of it being considered in a positive manner, in case, a direction is given to

respondent No.2 to decide the same in a time bound manner by granting them

an opportunity of hearing.

3. Notice of motion.

4. At the asking of the Court, Mr. Swapan Shorey, DAG, Punjab

accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and has no objection to the

limited prayer made.

5. In view of the aforesaid and without commenting upon the merits

of the case, this petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to respondent

No.2 to consider the representation dated 03.01.2024, Annexure P-10 and

decide the same taking note of the aforesaid judgment as referred to by learned

counsel for the petitioners, within a period of six months and

.

                                                                     (AMAN CHAUDHARY)
                                                                          JUDGE
             13.03.2024
             Hemant

                         Whether speaking/reasoned               :       Yes / No
                         Whether reportable                      :       Yes / No







integrity of this order/judgment