CWP No.16784 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH * * * * * CWP No.16784 of 2007 Date of decision : September 18, 2008 * * * * * Shakuntala Joshi @ Shakuntala Sharma ............Petitioner Versus Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited ...........Respondents * * * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH * * * * * Present: Mr. A.P Bhandari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Narender Hooda, Advocate for the respondent. * * * * * 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the digest? M.M KUMAR, J. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the order dated 5.12.2005 (Annexure P-1) passed by the respondent. According to the impugned order, promotion of the petitioner as Under Secretary/Administrative Officer has been made in her own pay scale and she was to get the pay scale of Under Secretary/Administrative Officer after completion of three years of service as Superintendent as required under the Recruitment and CWP No.16784 of 2007 2 Promotion Policy of Ministerial Establishment. When the matter came up for consideration on 28.8.2008, learned counsel for the respondent requested for an adjournment to seek instructions as to why the benefit of instructions dated 28.11.1994 and 22.4.1994 regarding pay fixation on or before promotion on higher scale be not granted to the petitioner. Mr. Narender Hooda, learned counsel for the respondent has stated after obtaining instructions from the Managing Director, Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited states that Note 1 of the order dated 5.12.2005 (Annexure P-1) shall be kept in abeyance and the case of the petitioner would be considered for her pay fixation on her premature promotion on higher pay scales according to the instructions dated 22.4.1994 and 28.11.1994 (Annexure P-2). He further states that the needful shall be done within a period of one month from today and if the benefit is found due to the petitioner, the same shall be released to her within a period of one month from the date of decision. Mr. A.P Bhandari, learned counsel for the petitioner does not press the petition in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondent. In view of the above, writ petition is disposed of. ( M.M KUMAR ) JUDGE September 18, 2008 ( JORA SINGH ) ritu JUDGE