Anuma Yadav v. State Of Haryana And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

Sr. No.: 113 Civil Writ Petition No.22083 of 2024 Date of Decision: December 04, 2024 Anuma Yadav ..... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

State of Haryana & others ..... RESPONDENT(S)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA PRESENT: - Mr. Rohit Mittal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. R.S. Budhwar, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.

Tribhuvan Dahiya, J (Oral) The petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the order, dated 23.04.2024, Annexure P-4, whereby the petitioner's claim for promotion to the post of PGT Political Science with effect from 13.04.2022 has been rejected.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the ground of rejecting the petitioner's case for promotion by the second respondent is factually incorrect, since the petitioner did M.A. Political Science on 03.12.2021 as established by certificate, Annexure P-5. The Department had called the cases of TGTs for promotion with the cut-off date for consideration as 15.01.2022. Therefore, the petitioner had the requisite qualification as well as experience at that time, still she was not considered for promotion. Her representation has also been rejected vide the impugned order on unfounded and baseless grounds that cut-off date to apply for promotion was 30.11.2021. Learned counsel has referred to the office order, dated 13.04.2022, whereby petitioner's juniors were notionally promoted as PGTs with effect from AVIN KUMAR 2024.12.10 18:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order.

CWP No.22083 of 2024 [2] 08.01.2021, and cut-off date to consider the employees for promotion was notified as 15.01.2022. These facts have been ignored by the second respondent while rejecting the petitioner's case. 3.

Learned State counsel, on instructions, is not in a position to dispute that the correct facts including the petitioner's qualification of M.A. Political Science, dated 03.12.2021, have not been taken into consideration by the second respondent. He fairly contends that the petitioner's case will be re-considered in the light of aforementioned facts and keeping in view her qualification as well as seniority in the cadre of TGT, after affording proper opportunity of hearing to her. If found eligible, she will be given due promotion from the date her juniors have been promoted. The process will be carried out by passing a fresh reasoned order within a period of six weeks. 4.

In view of the statement, learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection to the petition being disposed of in terms thereof. 5.

Ordered accordingly.

6.

In case the order is not passed within the stipulated period, the officer concerned shall pay costs of ` 50,000 to the petitioner. (Tribhuvan Dahiya) Judge December 04, 2024 avin Whether Speaking/ Reasoned:

Yes/ No Whether Reportable:

Yes/ No AVIN KUMAR 2024.12.10 18:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order.