IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 09.04.2026 Harshpal Kaur ….Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others ….Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: Mr. Narinder Pal Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Swapan Shorey, DAG, Punjab.

NAMIT KUMAR , J. (ORAL)

1. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the seniority list of Deputy Directors issued vide memo dated 10.10.2022 (Annexure P-6), wherein respondent No.4 has been assigned seniority above the petitioner and for quashing the proceedings dated 06.01.2026 of the Departmental Promotion Committee to the extent whereby respondent No.4, who is ineligible for promotion to the post of Joint Director against the reserve roster point, has been recommended for promotion without considering the name of the petitioner in the panel, who is fully eligible for promotion to the post of Joint Director against the reserve roster point meant for the Scheduled Castes.

and respondent No.4 are working as Deputy Directors in the Department of Industries and Commerce, Punjab. The next promotion is to the post of Joint Director for which five years’ experience as Deputy Director is required. The petitioner is fully eligible for promotion to the said post, however, without considering his claim, the DPC in the meeting held on 06.01.2026 has recommended the name of respondent No.4 for promotion to the post of Joint Director w.e.f. 16.08.2026, the date when he would become eligible on attaining five years’ experience. He has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India and others v. Sangram Keshari Nayak, 2007(3) SCT 512 and submits that consideration for promotion is a fundamental right and the same has been violated by the respondents in not considering the claim of the petitioner. He further submits that for redressal of her grievance the petitioner has moved a representation dated 16.02.2026 (Annexure P-10), however, no action has been taken by the respondents thereon till date. Learned counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer for considering the representation dated 16.02.2026 (Annexure P-10) and submits that at this stage, petitioner would be satisfied, if the said representation is considered and disposed of by passing a speaking order in a time-bound frame.

3. Notice of motion.

4. Mr. Swapan Shorey, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents and has no objection to the innocuous prayer made

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case.

6. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case or the claim being made by the petitioner in the present petition, respondent No.1 is directed to consider and decide the grievance raised by the petitioner in the representation dated 16.02.2026 (Annexure P- 10) in accordance with law, by passing a speaking order within a period of one month from today.

7. The petition stands disposed of.

09.04.2026 (NAMIT KUMAR)

R.S. JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No

Whether Reportable: Yes/No