IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 6886 of 2010 Date of Decision: 20.4.2010. R.S. Malik and others --Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. S.K. Tamak, Advocate for the petitioners. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) Notice of motion. Mr. R.K.S. Brar, Addl. A.G., Haryana has been asked to accept notice on behalf of respondents-State. Keeping in view the nature of relief claimed and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is being disposed of at the motion stage itself. All the petitioners are working as Sub Divisional Officers in the Irrigation Department in various divisions of the State of Haryana. They are from Civil Engineering Department. Promotion to the next post of Executive Engineer is to be made from the feeding channel of S.D.O. Respondents have called for the service records of the officials for their consideration by the Departmental Promotion Committee for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer. As is evident from Annexure P-5 the records of as many as 31 S.D.Os have been called for. The grievance of the petitioner is that though the posts are for Civil Engineers, however, persons from other disciplines like Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering and Computer Engineering are also being considered for promotion against CWP. No. 6886 of 2010 -2- the Civil Engineers' vacancies. The petitioners have relied upon Rule 8 which deals with the appointment and promotion and the notes appended thereto inter alia provides for consideration of the post from the concerned wing. According to the petitioners the respondents are making promotions in violation of Rule 8 particularly the notes appended thereto. The petitioners have served a legal notice (Annexure P-4) but no decision has been taken thereon till date. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners would be satisfied, if, respondents are directed to take decision on the legal notice served by the petitioners before making promotions. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.2 to take decision on the legal notice served by the petitioners within a period of one month from the date certified copy of this order is served upon the said respondent. Needless to say that the promotions shall be made in accordance with the mandate of the rules and while deciding the legal notice served by the petitioners, the rule position shall be kept in mind. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 20.4.2010. lucky