IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No. 10318 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION : AUGUST 26, 2009 MEENA RANI ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Dr. ML Sachdeva, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. BS Chahal, DAG, Punjab. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) Meena Rani has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to promote her as Lecturer in Mathematics from the date her juniors have been promoted, with all consequential benefits. It has been pleaded on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner became entitled to promotion in the year 2001. The Department Civil Writ Petition No. 10318 of 2009 2 of Education requisitioned the cases of Masters/Mistresses for promotion to the post of Lecturer on 18.8.2001. The case of the petitioner was submitted by the Principal, Government Senior Secondary School, Bhagwanpur Jattan, District Patiala, to the District Education Officer (Schools), Patiala, for onward transmission to the Head Office. No action thereon was taken. The case of the petitioner was again submitted on 23.3.2003 and 19.4.2004. It has been pleaded that the petitioner has not been promoted despite the fact that the Annual Confidential Reports of the petitioner are good/very good/excellent for the last 6 years. It has been asserted on behalf of the petitioner that, as per Circular letter dated 29.12.2000, the petitioner is eligible to be considered for promotion. Juniors to the petitioner have been promoted and, therefore, a valuable right of the petitioner has been violated. It has been argued that the petitioner is not being promoted as the promotion has been linked to inadequate results of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent-State has pointed out that, in case, the petitioner has not been promoted on account of inadequate results, the case of the petitioner would be considered in so much as the Department of Education, vide instructions dated 21.8.2009, has passed the following order:- “Subject: Consideration of results of classes taught by teachers while promoting him/her to the next higher post. Reference on the subject noted above. 2. The matter has been reconsidered and it has been decided to withdraw the instructions contained in Memo No.15/46/2004-2Edu 2/12766 dated 9.6.2005 being Civil Writ Petition No. 10318 of 2009 3 contrary to the provisions of Punjab State Education Service Class-III (Service Cadre) Service Rules, 1978. 3. It is made clear that the cases of all employees who have been ignored for promotion earlier on this account should be reviewed. 4. This letter is issued with the approval of Secretary, School Education.” This petition is disposed of with directions to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion under the rules applicable to the service of the petitioner. In case, the petitioner has been denied promotion on account of inadequate results, the respondents would take into account instructions dated 21.8.2009, extracted above, and the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP No.4757 of 2000 (Jasvir Kaur v. State of Punjab and others) decided on 21.2.2002 (Annexure P-18). 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?