IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. L.P.A. No.1460 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 6.1.2010 Virender Redhu & others. -----Appellants Vs. The State of Haryana & others. -----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present:- Mr. Jagdeep Singh, Advocate for the appellants. --- ORDER: 1. This appeal has been preferred against order of learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition of the appellants seeking direction for consideration for promotion to the post of Math Master under 20% quota under the Haryana State School Cadre (Group-C) Service Rules, 1998. 2. The appellants were appointed as JBT teachers in the year 2000. Further promotion is to the post of Math Master. They were, however, not considered for promotion on account of pendency of proceedings, challenging their appointments. LPA No.1460 of 2009 3. Grievance raised in the writ petition was that some persons similarly placed were given promotion without considering the appellants and thus, there was discrimination. 4. Learned Single Judge disposed of the petition with a direction that if their appointments are upheld, their case for promotion be considered within three months from the finalization of the proceedings, involving challenge to their appointments. Review petition was filed stating that challenge to their appointments has been finalised. The said petition was dismissed on the ground that there was no averment in the pleadings to the effect that proceedings challenging their appointments had been finalised. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants. 6. It has been submitted that proceedings challenging their appointments had since been finalised and that some promotions had already been made by the District Education Officers, as admitted in the written statement filed on behalf of the respondents. 7. We find that in the impugned order of learned Single Judge, direction has already been issued for consideration of case of the appellants after proceedings challenging their appointments are finalised. If the same have been finalised, direction of learned Single Judge already exists in favour of the appellants, which they can enforce in appropriate proceedings. 2 LPA No.1460 of 2009 8. No ground is made out for interference with the impugned order. 9. The appeal is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE January 06, 2010 ( ALOK SINGH ) ashwani JUDGE 3