R.S.A.No.2499 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A.No.2499 of 2007 Date of Decision : 27.8.2009 Mohammed Iqbal ...Appellant Versus Dakshin Haryana Bijli ...Respondents Vitran Nigam Ltd. and others CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA 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: Mr. G.K.Chawla, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Monish Sharma, Advocate, for Mr. Narender Hooda, Advocate, for respondent Nos.1 to 6. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The plaintiff is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the learned first Appellate Court on 23.12.2006, whereby the claim of the plaintiff for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer from the date his junior Mohinder Singh was promoted i.e. 25.7.2003, was rejected. The learned first Appellate Court has found that the plaintiff- appellant was considered for promotion when his junior was promoted, but since disciplinary proceedings are pending against him, therefore, the plaintiff cannot be promoted from 25.7.2003. R.S.A.No.2499 of 2007 2 The appellant has moved an application for additional evidence before this Court, pointing out that after the judgment of the learned first Appellate Court, the disciplinary proceedings, which were pending, when the order dated 25.7.2003 was passed, has since been withdrawn vide order dated 25.9.2007. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to be promoted from the date his junior was promoted. Learned first Appellate Court has held that on the date of passing of the judgment and decree dated 23.12.2006, the disciplinary proceedings were pending against the appellant. Therefore, it cannot be said that any substantial question of law arises from the findings recorded by the learned first Appellate Court. But keeping in view the fact that the proceedings against the appellants have since been dropped, it is incumbent upon the defendant- respondents to pass appropriate order consequent to dropping of the departmental proceedings against the appellant. In view of the said fact, the present appeal is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to pass an appropriate order in respect of the claim of the plaintiff for promotion within three months from today. With the said direction, the appeal stands disposed of. 27.08.2009 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE