Neelam v. State Of Punjab & ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No. 3859 of 2016 Date of decision: 29.04.2016 Neelam ....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab and others

...Respondent(s)

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

Present:

Mr. P.S. Khurana Advocate, for the petitioner.

G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J. (Oral) The petitioner is aggrieved against the non mention of her name in the seniority list of Master/Mistress cadre in Annexure P-5, the final seniority list.

The pleaded case of the petitioner is that she had applied for the post of Science Mistress in the Ex-Serviceman dependent SC category against the advertisement dated 12.06.2006. Her name was not included in the final seniority list. She was not appointed, due to which, she filed CWP No. 18027 of 2008, which was decided on 17.10.2008 (Annexure P-1/A) with a direction to decide the representation. In pursuance of the same, appointment letter dated 07.08.2009 (Annexure P-2) was issued to her and she was posted in Government High School, Bani Lodhi, Gurdaspur. It is her case that tentative seniority list of Science Mistresses was released, in which her name figured at Sr. No. 3302 (Annexure P-3). She had filed representation on 10.05.

2013 (Annexure P-4) that her name be considered alongwith similarly situated persons who had joined in the year 2006 against the same advertisement by giving them notional pay fixation, seniority. It is thus her case that in the final seniority list (Annexure P-5), SHIVANI GUPTA 2016.05.

-2her name does not figure. It is the case of the petitioner that she had represented on 04.12.2015 (Annexure P-6) also to the same extent and asked the respondents to look into the issue and also consider her for promotion to the post of Lecturer. Reliance has also been placed upon instructions dated 20.11.2009 (Annexure P-6/A) that notional benefit is to be given to a person who was to be appointed subsequently regarding the same advertisement. It is submitted that thereafter also, her name was sent in the reserved category for promotion to the post of Lecturer but in her case, it has been returned on 21.01.2016 (Annexure P-8) on account of the fact that it is not covered as per seniority. Notice of motion.

Mr. R.S. Sidhu, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Copy of the writ petition has been supplied to him. Keeping in view the limited controversy and the fact that the decision making process is still not complete regarding the representation dated 04.12.2015 (Annexure P-6), as alleged by the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that the reply need not be called for. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case or the entitlement of the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 2 to look into the representation dated 04.12.2015 (Annexure P-6) and decide the same within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. Needless to say if an adverse order is to be passed, the same shall contain reasons and be conveyed to the petitioner.

29.04.2016 (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) shivani JUDGE SHIVANI GUPTA 2016.05.05 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh