IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 13263 of 2008 Date of Decision: 6.5.2009. Dinesh Kaushik & another --Petitioners Versus State of Punjab & others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. Kapil Kakkar, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Chahal, DAG, Punjab. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) The petitioners were serving as Masters. The next promotion from the post of Master is to the post of Lecturer. Under the rules 75% posts of Lecturers are to be filled up by promotion amongst the Masters/Mistresses, whereas 25% posts are required to be filled up by direct recruitment. The petitioners fall in the promotion quota. Vide memo dated 15.3.2007 the Director, Public Instructions (SC), Punjab, Chandigarh asked the concerned officers to forward the complete cases of Masters/Mistresses to the Directorate by 26.3.2007 for consideration for promotion. However, this circular was dispatched under endorsement dated 29.3.2007 and was circulated after 30.3.2007 i.e. beyond the time prescribed by the memo itself. Be that as it may, the petitioners along with some other Masters were promoted as Lecturers vide order dated 30.5.2008 (Annexure P-11). Petitioner Dinesh Kaushik joined on 9.6.2008. It is alleged that the second petitioner also joined simultaneously. Vide order dated 21.7.2008 the posting order of the promoted Masters/Mistresses were issued but the CWP. No. 13263 of 2008 -2- petitioners were not posted anywhere. Having been denied the posting, petitioners filed the present petition seeking following directions:- (i) To produce the complete records of the case; (ii) to issue a suitable writ, order or direction especially in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to immediately issue the posting orders to the petitioners as Lecturers in English as has been done in the case of similarly situated Masters vide order dated 23.7.2008 (Annexure P-14) and in view of the appointment of the petitioners as Lecturers vide order dated 30.5.2008 (Annexure P-11). (iii) It is further prayed that during the pendency of the writ petition, the respondents may be restrained from filling up the post of Lecturer in English at Govt. Sr. Secondary School, Duggarl, Distt. Patiala and Govt. Sr. Secondary School, Banga, Distt. Sangrur i.e. the stations which were allotted to the petitioners through public notice (Annexure P-13). (iv) It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may grant any other relief, which it may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. (v) requirement of filing of the certified copies of annexures may kindly be dispensed with; (vi) requirement of advance notice on the respondents may kindly be dispensed with; (vii) Cost of the petition be awarded in favour of the petitioners. On being put to notice the respondents have taken a categoric stand that the petitioners were inadvertently promoted as Lecturers. It is CWP. No. 13263 of 2008 -3- alleged that they do not fulfill the condition of requisite qualification on cut off date i.e. 15.3.2007 as per memo dated 15.3.2007 endorsed on 30.3.2007 and thus they are not eligible for promotion and posting as well. To the contrary Mr. Kakkar, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to para 12 of the writ petition, wherein it is pleaded that the petitioners acquired the Post Graduation qualification and submitted their requisite certificates with the respondents on 3.4.2007 and 5.4.2007. According to Mr. Kakkar the petitioners had acquired the higher quaification of M.A. English prior to the cut off date and provisional certificates were deposited with the respondents, however, the qualification certificates were issued later. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the petitioners were promoted vide Annexure P-11. They also joined the posts vide Annexure P- 12. The respondents have denied them the postings on the ground that they did not fulfill the qualification, which clearly indicate that the respondents intend to withdraw the promotion earlier granted to the petitioners. The petitioners were never put to notice nor they were granted any opportunity of being heard. The action of the respondents is against the principle of natural justice and in gross violation of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with the following directions: (i) The respondents are at liberty to issue a show cause notice to the petitioners on the basis of the allegations/grounds in the reply to this petition. (ii) The petitioners shall be given adequate opportunity of being heard and to reply the show cause notice. They will also be provided CWP. No. 13263 of 2008 -4- opportunity of personal hearing. (iii) The petitioners are at liberty to submit the requisite documents to the respondents along with the show cause notice or at the time of personal hearing. After granting such opportunity the respondents will pass a fresh speaking order. Let the entire exercise be completed within a period of three months from the date certified copy of this order is served upon the competent authority. Till the entire exercise is completed, the present status of the petitioners shall not be disturbed. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 6.5.2009 lucky