IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 307 of 2010. [O&M] Date of Decision: 30th March, 2010. SI Lakhwinder Singh& Ors. Petitioners through Mr. Gurminder Singh, Advocate Versus State of Punjab & Ors. Respondents through Mr. B.S.Chahal, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Vikram Bali, Advocate. Mr. APS Shergill, Advocate. 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? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL] This order shall dispose of CWP Nos. 307, 689, 1101 and 3385 of 2010 as common issues are involved in all these cases. The petitioners as well as the private respondents are serving as Sub Inspectors in the Punjab Police. Besides their inter- se seniority dispute, the petitioners are aggrieved at the orders dated 01.01.2010 and 04.01.2010 [Annexures P-4 and P-5] whereby the private respondents have been approved for entry to promotion list 'F' prepared as on 1.1.2010 for promotion to the rank of Inspectors under the Punjab Police Rules, 1934. The petitioners also impugn preparation of separate seniority lists for different cadres. A direction is also sought for consolidation of the seniority lists at State level and thereafter to make further promotions. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that the issues raised in this writ petition can be effectively gone into by the Officers' Committee constituted by this Court in CWP No. 566 of 2010 Ranjit Singh & Ors. V State of Punjab & Ors. Counsel for the petitioners, however, has some reservations against composition of the said Committee for the reason that its one or two members are stated to have dealt with the petitioners' claim on administrative side. The objection raised on behalf of the petitioners appears to be fair and just as it may not be expedient to entrust the task to resolve the issues to those very Officers who have earlier dealt with the matter on administrative side, particularly when the doctrine of necessity need not be pressed into aid in such like cases. In these circumstances, let there be another Committee headed by Shri S.K.Sharma, IPS, Additional Director General of police, Human Rights, Punjab, Chandigarh along with Mr. Parag Jain, IPS, IGP/Head Quarters, Punjab Police and Shri M.S.Gill, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, to be duly assisted by Shri H.S.Sidhu, IPS, DIG, Punjab Police. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of with the following directions:- [i] the afore-stated Committee shall hear the petitioners and other affected persons and then make its recommendations within a period of three months; [ii] the Committee may also hear counsel for the parties. However, for that purpose only one opportunity shall be afforded so that the issues can be adjudicated within the stipulated time; [iii] the Committee shall be guided by the principles already indicated by this Court vide order dated 04.03.2010 passed in CWP No. 566 of 2010 [Ranjit Singh & Ors. V State of Punjab & Ors.]; [iv] the recommendations of the Committee shall be supported with reasons; [v] the recommendations of the Committee shall ordinarily be implemented by the State Government unless it disagrees for the reasons to be recorded in writing; [vi] the aggrieved party shall be at liberty to seek redressal of its grievance before an appropriate forum. [vii] meanwhile promotions of the Police Personnel shall not be stalled but the same shall abide by the decision that may be taken by the Committee. Disposed of. Dasti. March 30, 2010. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE