IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.9353 of 2010 Date of Decision : May 20, 2010. Charanjeet Kaur .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Surmukh Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.K.S.Sidhu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. -.- 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? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1 to 3 only at this stage. Mr.K.S.Sidhu, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on their behalf. In view of the nature of the order which I propose to pass, there is no necessity to seek any counter-reply from the official- respondents at this stage. The petitioner seeks a mandamus for her appointment as S.S. Mistress against the reserved post of Backward Class (Female). It is the petitioner's case that she has got 72.457 merit points as against 72.379 merit points secured by respondent No.4. The petitioner has further C.W.P.No .9353 of 2010 2 averred that though her name also figured at Sr.No.2 in the final merit list dated 26.11.2006 (Annexure P-7) yet no appointment letter has been issued to her and the candidates lower in merit like respondent No.4 have been given appointment. The petitioner is said to have represented the authorities in this regard, followed by a legal notice dated 17.2.2010 (Annexure P-10) but without any response thereto. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the considered view that if the facts averred by the petitioner were to be correct, respondent Nos.2 & 3 are obligated to consider her claim and take cognizance of the legal notice dated 17.2.2010( Annexure P-10), served on her behalf. Consequently, respondent Nos.2 & 3 are directed to consider the claim of the petitioner for her appointment as S.S. Mistress in the reserved category of Backward Class (female) in order of her merit and if she is found entitled, to offer her appointment within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Disposed of. Dasti. May 20, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE