HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.13056 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 30.08.2011 **** Sunita Rani . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab & Anr. . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 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? **** Present: Dr. ML Sachdeva, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, DAG Punjab ***** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner is a physically challenged person and is suffering with 40% orthopaedic disability. She competed for the posts of JBT/ETT in the reserved category of physically-challenged persons for whom 3% posts were reserved i.e. 1% for orthopaedically-challenged persons, 1% for blind and 1% for deaf and dumb. The petitioner was at Sr.No.6 amongst the Orthopaedically-challenged persons and there being only 4 posts that she was not given appointment. However, due to non-availability of the candidates in the deaf and dumb category their 8 posts were decided to be filled in from amongst the candidates belonging to other sub-categories of physically-challenged persons. CWP No.13056 of 2010.doc - 2 – (2). The petitioner was also selected along with 7 other candidates who got appointment on 16.07.2004 but the petitioner was appointed after about 4 years i.e. on 28.3.2008 only. She now seeks a direction to the respondents to assign her seniority from the date the other similarly-placed candidates were appointed. (3). As the facts would speak for themselves, there was not apparent reason for the respondents to deny appointment to the petitioner for about four years when other similarly- placed candidates were appointed in the year 2004. While the petitioner can be denied the arrears of pay on the principle of ‘no work no pay’, she is certainly entitled for deemed seniority w.e.f. 16.07.2004 and/or the date when other candidates were given appointment, besides notional benefits. (4). Ordered accordingly. (5). The writ petition is allowed in the above terms. (6). The needful shall be done within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (7). Dasti. 30.08.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge