IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.12346 of 2010 Date of Decision: July 15, 2010 Hardev Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Aman Bansal, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to promote the petitioner as Lecturer w.e.f. June 2008 i.e. the date when persons junior to the petitioner had been promoted. 2. Learned counsel contends that promotion of the petitioner became due and Head Master, Government High School, Mangewal, District Barnala, recommended the case of the petitioner to the District Education Officer CWP No.12346 of 2010 [2] (Secondary Education), Barnala vide letter dated 5.5.2008 (Annexure P-1). Subsequently, another reminder was sent in February 2009 as is evident from Annexure P-2. Claim of the petitioner for promotion was however not considered. In such circumstances, petitioner gave a Justice Demand Notice dated 14.6.2010 (Annexure P-3), however, no decision has been taken. 3. Learned counsel contends that only notional promotion can be given to the petitioner as he has already retired, however, the claim is required to be considered because persons junior to the petitioner were promoted. 4. Notice of motion. 5. On the asking of the Court, Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Requisite number of copies of the writ petition have been handed over to learned counsel for the respondents in Court. 6. On request of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up at this stage itself for final adjudication in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. 7. Heard. 8. Learned counsel for the respondent- State says that indeed the case of the petitioner CWP No.12346 of 2010 [3] is required to be looked into, he having served a Justice Demand Notice (Annexure P-3) on the plea that persons junior to the petitioner had been promoted while case of the petitioner for promotion has been ignored. 9. Considering the above facts and circumstances, it is directed that the respondents would take decision on Justice Demand Notice dated 14.6.2010 (Annexure P-3) within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 10. It is made clear that the petitioner would be given personal hearing before a final decision is taken. Decision be taken vide a speaking and reasoned order which would be conveyed to the petitioner. (AJAI LAMBA) July 15, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?