IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 5809 of 2010 Date of Decision: 24.5.2010 Youth Welfare Association ..Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKUL MUDGAL, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present : Mrs. Anju Arora, Advocate with Ms. Aditi Girdhar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Rupinder Khosla, Addl. A.G. Punjab for the respondents. ***** MUKUL MUDGAL, C.J. (Oral) This writ petition has been filed in public interest by Youth Welfare Association for visually handicapped and disabled (Regd.) praying therein that a mandamus be issued directing the respondents to grant reservation in promotion to the physical handicapped and further with a prayer that at least 3% posts for promotion be reserved amongst the physically handicapped employees of the State Government on the pattern of the Central Government. CWP No. 5809 of 2010 [2] This matter had came up for hearing before this Court on 31.3.2010 when the following order was passed:- “The main plea of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the issue involved in the present writ petition namely the availability of reservation under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 is not available only at the time of recruitment but is also available in promotional avenues. The aforesaid issue stands decided by a judgment of this Court in CWP No. 12741 of 2009 vide order dated 18.03.2010, in favour of the petitioner. That judgment pertains to the State of Haryana and it is the case of learned counsel for the petitioner that the said judgment may also be made applicable to Punjab State. Notice of motion. Mr. Rupinder Khosla, Addl: A.G.Punjab accepts notice. He prays for and is granted four weeks time to file response. Rejoinder, if any, within four weeks thereafter. The petition shall be taken up on May 07, 2010 for hearing and disposed of on that date.” 3. The aforesaid order clearly indicates that it was made clear that on 7.5.2010, the petition would be disposed of. Despite orders dated 31.3.2010 and 7.5.2010, no reply till today has been filed by the State of Punjab. Today again Mr. Khosla prays for three months more time to file the reply stating that he has been informed by the respondents that matter involved in the writ petition being a policy matter requires more time to file the reply. The prayer made by Mr. Khosla is not acceptable to us because the issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by a judgment of this Court in case Viklang Sang Haryana V. State of Haryana and others, passed in Civil Writ Petition No. 12741 of 2009 decided on 18.03.2010. Mr. Khosla failed to distinguish as to how the grievance raised in the present writ petition is not squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment. CWP No. 5809 of 2010 [3] 4. Accordingly, we allow this writ petition in the terms of the order dated 18.3.2010 rendered by this Court in Viklang Sang's case (supra) and also direct the respondents to keep 3% posts reserved for promotion for the disabled by giving them promotions as per directions and guidelines issued by the Ministry of Personnel dated 20.11.1989 (Annexure P-5) not later than six months from today. (MUKUL MUDGAL) CHIEF JUSTICE (JASBIR SINGH) JUDGE 24.05.2010 'ravinder'