IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.5940 of 2010 Date of Decision : April 01, 2010. Smt.Joginder Kaur .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Bipan Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 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) The petitioner, who joined the Language Department, Government of Punjab as a Copy Holder and was later on promoted firstly as a Proof Reader, followed by Research Assistant and then as a Research Officer, has retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.4.2008. The sole grievance of the petitioner is that much before her retirement, four posts of Assistant Director/District Language Officers became available due to retirement of the incumbents in the years 2007- 2008 and she was entitled to be promoted against one of these posts. As the D.P.C. was not convened in time, the petitioner represented before the authorities on 9.1.2008 (Annexure P-5) followed by another representation dated 18.2.2008 (Annexure P-6) and her representation was favourably C.W.P.No .5940 of 2010 2 recommended by the Ministerial-Incharge. However, no decision was taken by the Competent Authority on these recommendations and meanwhile the petitioner retired w.e.f. 30.4.2008 on attaining the age of superannuation. The petitioner urges that had the DPC been convened in time, she would have been further promoted, giving yet another boost to her retiral benefits. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner at some length and considering the nature of relief sought in this writ petition, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the same with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and dispose of the claim of the petitioner for promotion from the due date when the vacancies occurred, by passing a speaking order, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. It is further directed that in case the petitioner is found entitled to the retrospective promotion, the consequential order shall be passed within a period of one month thereafter and her retiral benefits be also revised accordingly. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. April 01, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE