IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.1261 of 1991 (O&M) Date of Decision : 27.01.2010. Suniti Madhok .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Dr.Balram Gupta, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Shireesh Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms.Charu Tuli, Senior DAG, 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? --- ORDER Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner seeks a direction to promote her as Additional Director in the Department of Education w.e.f. 26.9.1989, i.e., the date when the post fell vacant. There is indeed no doubt that the petitioner has been an outstanding teacher, Headmistress as well as a member of the PES Class- II. The outstanding services of the petitioner were further recognized when she was honoured with the State Award and, in fact, re-employed for a period of one year on 1.11.1989 after her retirement on 31.10.1989. C.W.P.No .1261 of 1991 (O&M) 2 At the same time, the fact remains that the promotional post fell vacant on 26.9.1989 and within 36 days, the petitioner stood retired on superannuation on 31.10.1989. The time was too short to constitute and convene the DPC and promote her before she retired. The fact that the respondents recognized outstanding performance of the petitioner and granted her re-employment for a period of one year, indicates that there is no deliberate inaction on their part to deprive the petitioner of her due promotion. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. 27-01-2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE