IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 5392 of 2004 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: May 26, 2009 Pardeep Bhalla …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. BHALLA Present: Mr. Pritam Saini, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Ritu Bahri, DAG, Haryana, for the respondents. 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? M.M. KUMAR, J. The instant petition prays for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari quashing order dated 24.2.2004 passed by the Commissioner and Secretary, P.W.D. (Public Health Branch)- respondent No. 1. The basis of the prayer made is that Rule 7 Appendix ‘B’ of the Haryana Service of Chemist, Public Works Department (Public Health Branch) (Group-B) Rules, 1996 (for C.W.P. No. 5392 of 2004 brevity, ‘the Rules’) did not provide for promotion in respect of the post of Laboratory Technician to the further higher post of Chemist. The respondent department has made recommendation for amendment of the 1996 Rules. According to the recommendation, the post of Laboratory Technician was to be incorporated as feeder cadre for appointment to the post of Chemist. On 6.5.2009, we have directed the respondents to consider the recommendations made by respondent No. 2 and if the proposal made by the department was in order then to amend the 1996 Rules accordingly. In pursuance of the direction issued, the State Government has now issued a notification dated 21.5.2009, thereby notifying the amended rules, namely, the Haryana Service of Chemist, Public Works Department (Public Health Branch) (Group B) Service (Amendment) Rules, 2009 amending the 1996 Rules. Accordingly, amendment has been made in the 1996 Rules and the post of Laboratory Technician has been included for further promotion to the post of Chemist. A copy of the said notification is taken on record as Mark-‘A’. In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that in the light of the amendment the case of the petitioner deserves to be considered for promotion. Therefore, order dated 24.2.2004 (P-15) would not survive in the face of the amendment now made and the same has to be kept in abeyance. Accordingly, we dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 2 C.W.P. No. 5392 of 2004 respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with the amended rules (Mark-‘A’). The same shall be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Court. The writ petition and other pending civil miscellaneous applications stands disposed of. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (H.S. BHALLA) May 26, 2009 JUDGE Pkapoor 3