CWP No.9129 of 1990 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.9129 of 1990 Date of Decision: 29.4.2010 Smt. Joginderjit Kaur ……Petitioner VERSUS The State of Punjab and others ……Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH -.- Present: Mr. P.S. Goraya, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jaswinder Singh, 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? ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) 1. This writ petition was filed way back in 1990 seeking writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to complete the service book of the petitioner and to fix pay after granting all the benefits due in terms of increments/crossing of efficiency bar/promotion and to pay all the arrears alongwith 18% interest. 2. Order dated 7.1.1991 passed by this Court reveals that statement was made by learned Counsel for the respondents that duplicate service book is being prepared. Today Mr. Jaswinder Singh, DAG, Punjab appearing for the respondents made statement CWP No.9129 of 1990 -2- at bar that duplicate service book has already been prepared. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner fairly states petitioner does not want to challenge any entry in the service book. He further states that as per the entry made in the service book, direction may be issued to the respondents to grant all the benefits to the petitioner. 4. Learned Counsel for the respondents states that in the writ petition there is no averment as to when petitioner became entitled for the increments/crossing of efficiency bar/promotion. In the absence of averments made in the writ petition, it would not be possible for the respondents either to reply or to make compliance thereon. 5. In view of the fact that duplicate service book has already been prepared and petitioner has no objection about the entries made therein, hence, petitioner should move representation before the respondents with elaborate contentions therein about the fact as to when petitioner became entitled for increments/crossing of efficiency bar/promotion. Petitioner can move such representation before the respondents within a month from today. On being received such representation, respondents No.2 and 3 shall take decision thereon in accordance with law by speaking order within two months thereafter. 6. Hence, petition stands disposed of in view of the above terms. ( ALOK SINGH ) 29th April, 2010 JUDGE CWP No.9129 of 1990 -3- ashish