IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No.14060 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION : AUGUST 26, 2010 DR. SATISH SACHDEVA ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. Dhiraj Chawla, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. JS Puri, Addl.AG, Punjab. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent No.1 i.e. State of Punjab through Secretary, Department of Medical Education and Research, Punjab, to promote the petitioner to the post of Assistant Professor (Medicine) from the date the recommendations (Annexure P-4) were made by the Departmental Promotion Committee, recommending the name of the petitioner, he being the senior most eligible candidate. Reply has been filed in court today, which is taken on record. Learned counsel for the respondent-State contends that the Civil Writ Petition No.14060 of 2010 2 petitioner has not disclosed to the court that a representation was made by the petitioner, which has been disposed of vide a speaking order dated 28.7.2010, endorsed on 30.7.2010, a copy whereof has also been forwarded to the petitioner. It is the stand of the respondents that backlog of reserved category was required to be filled up. In such circumstances, Dr. Shiv Charan, a Scheduled Caste candidate, was considered and has been promoted to the post of Assistant Professor. Accordingly, the petitioner could not have been promoted. It is further the stand of the respondent-State that the petitioner would be considered in the forthcoming Departmental Promotion Committee meeting. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner would like to challenge order dated 28.7.2010, endorsed on 30.7.2010, which has been placed on record as Annexure R-1. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner as prayed for. August 26, 2010 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?