IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.18411 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision : 12.01.2010. Urmil Devi .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Kumar Vishav Aggarwal, 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) Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1 & 2 only at this stage. Ms.Charu Tuli, learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on their behalf. In view of the nature of the order which I propose to pass, there is no necessity to file any counter reply on behalf of the respondents at this stage. The petitioner seeks a direction to the official respondents to consider her claim as contained in the representation dated 16.2.2009 (Annexure P-4) and grant her promotion from the due date, as has been done in the case of similar situated employees, in terms of the order dated C.W.P.No .18411 of 2009 (O&M) 2 31.8.2006 passed by this Court in C.M.No.6309 of 2005 in CWP No.3854 of 1996 (Om Parkash Aneja and others versus State of Punjab etc.). Suffice it to observe at this stage that the petitioner was working as a Senior Assistant till she retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.6.2009. Just before her retirement, she made a representation dated 16.2.2009 for her promotion as Superintendent Grade- I. Pending consideration of the said representation, the petitioner retired. It is averred that after this Court had modified the ad-interim stay order earlier granted on August 31, 2006 in C.M.No.6309 of 2005 in CWP No.3854 of 1996, the official respondents have considered the claim of private respondent Nos.3 & 4 and promoted them as Superintendent Grade-I but the claim of the petitioner has been over-looked by the respondents for no valid reason. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at some length, however, without expressing any views on the merit of the petitioner's case, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1- Principal Secretary to Government of Punjab, PWD (B&R) Department, to consider the claim of the petitioner as contained in her representation dated 16.2.2009 (Annexure P-4), and dispose of the same by passing a speaking order as early as possible and preferably within a period of 4 months. Disposed of. Dasti. 12-01-2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE