IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P No.13807 of 2011 Date of Decision:2.8.2011 Krishan Kumar .... Petitioner Versus The Haryana State Federation of Coop. Sugar Mills Ltd. Panchkula and another .... Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr. J.P. Dhull, Advocate for the petitioner. **** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers 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? NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (Oral) Through the present writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for issuance a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Deputy Chief Engineer. It is evident from the reply to the legal notice which is impugned before this Court that the said promotion is not being made as financial condition of the sugar mill is not so good and at present sugar mill is running at a loss of about 100 crores. It is further stated that it is not possible to fill up the posts of Deputy Chief Engineer because the work in mills is going well without filling this post. There is no requirement of filling the post of Deputy Chief Engineer. Moreover, in the crushing season raw material remains very short and mill management does not feel the need to fill up this post. Argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the same shall not put extra burden as the petitioner is already getting C.W.P No.13807 of 2011 -2- higher scale has no merit in view of para 7 of the reply to the legal notice wherein it is stated that in case the petitioner is promoted to the post of Deputy Chief Engineer, the mill shall have to fill up the post of A.E.(M) which would again put further financial burden. The mere fact that post exists does not give a right to the employee to seek promotion on the post. Employer may fill the post or not fill the post. Mandamus cannot be issued unless there is discrimination. No such discrimination is pointed out. Rather, the respondents had justified vide P-6 reply, to the show cause notice, as to why the respondents have decided not to make the promotion at this stage. Moreover, no junior to the petitioner is promoted. In view of the well settled proposition of law, no writ in the nature of mandamus can be issued to the respondents to fill up the posts by promotion in the facts of the present case. Dismissed. 2.8.2011 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE