High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/18870/2015disposed of

Nirmal Singh v. State Of Punjab & ORS

2015-09-08Mr. Justice A.B. Chaudhari2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No. 18870 of 2015 Date of decision: 08.09.2015 Nirmal Singh ....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab and others

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA

Present:

Mr. Manish Dadwal, Advocate, for the petitioner.

G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J. (Oral) Prayer in the present writ petition is for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Superintendent from amongst 3% quota meant for physically handicapped category. The above said demand is on the basis of the judgments of the Division Bench in CWP No. 5809 of 2010 (Annexure P-4) and CWP No. 11467 of 2010 (Annexure P-5). The circular issued by the State on 05.07.2011 (Annexure P-6) in pursuance of the orders of this Court has also been relied upon.

It is the case of the petitioner that he is 60% disabled having suffered a bullet injury in Jammu & Kashmir. It is the case of the petitioner that he is working as Senior Assistant and presently posted as a Reader to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Dasuya. His request has been forwarded by the Deputy Commissioner, Hoshiarpur to respondent no. 3-Commissioner, Jalandhar Division on 01.04.2013 but no action has been taken on the same. He has also submitted a representation dated 18.03.2015 (Annexure P-11) but no action has been taken on the same.

Counsel submits that he would be satisfied if a direction is SHIVANI GUPTA 2015.09.09 15:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

-2issued to the respondents to take a decision on the said representation within a time bound frame.

Accordingly, keeping in view the limited relief sought and without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court does not feel necessary to call upon the respondents to file reply. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 3 to decide the representation dated 18.03.2015 (Annexure P-11) within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. Needless to say that in case the relief is to be denied, the order should contain reasons.

08.09.2015 (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) shivani JUDGE SHIVANI GUPTA 2015.09.09 15:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh