IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.11733 of 2010 Date of Decision: July 07, 2010 Bhag Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Aman Bansal, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent Nos.1 and 2 to promote the petitioner to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police. 2. It has been contended by the learned counsel that seniority list was published on the internet. The petitioner is clearly senior to Sant Singh, Rajinder Singh and Ram Parkash (respondent No.3). Despite the seniority of the petitioner, the said three persons who are junior CWP No.11733 of 2010 [2] to the petitioner, have been promoted to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police. 3. It has specifically been asserted that there is no legal impediment in the promotion of the petitioner and the petitioner is eligible for promotion yet the case of the petitioner has been ignored. In such circumstances, the petitioner has already made a representation dated 29.12.2009 (Annexure P-2) to the Director General of Police, Punjab. 4. Learned counsel contends that no decision on representation (Annexure P-2) of the petitioner has been taken. The petitioner is scheduled to retire on 30.9.2010. Any further delay shall defeat the rights of the petitioner. 5. Notice of motion. 6. Ms. Charu Tuli, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, on the asking of the Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2. Requisite number of copies of the petition have been given to the learned counsel for the respondents in Court. 7. On request of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final adjudication today in view of peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. 8. I have considered the issue. CWP No.11733 of 2010 [3] 9. The Director General of Police, Punjab, is directed to take a decision on representation dated 29.12.2009 (Annexure P-2) of the petitioner, within two months of receipt of a certified copy of this order and convey the same to the petitioner. It is made clear that the petitioner would be given personal hearing before any decision is taken. Hearing be given to other affected persons also if the principles of natural justice so require. 10. The petition is disposed of accordingly. (AJAI LAMBA) July 07, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?