IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.9791 of 2010 Date of Decision : May 25, 2010. Amarjeet Singh and others .....Petitioners versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Sukhjinder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners. -.- 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) The petitioners who are E.T.T. Teachers of the Education Department, Government of Punjab, seek a mandamus to direct the respondents “to provide two promotional avenues to them”. Reliance is placed on certain decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as this Court. No Rule or Policy, however, has been referred to in terms whereof the aforesaid claim can be substantiated. It appears that the petitioners want to compel the respondents to take a fresh policy decision and/or amend the Rules to provide promotional avenues to them. Be that as it may, the petitioners have sent representations to the authorities in this regard on 18.8.2008 and 11.11.2008 (Annexures P-5 C.W.P.No .9791 of 2010 2 & P-6 respectively). In the light of the nature of relief sought in this writ petition, however, without expressing any views on the merits thereof, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the same with a direction to respondent No.3 to consider the above-mentioned claim of the petitioner and dispose of the same by passing a speaking order within a period of six months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. This order shall not be constructed as a direction to provide promotional channel to the petitioners and the authorities shall be at liberty to take a conscious policy decision in this regard. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. May 25, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE