Surender Kaur vs State Of Haryana And Others

Harsimran Singh Sethi, J

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the claim of the petitioner for promotion is being denied by the respondents on the ground that the

petitioner is not having 50% marks in graduation whereas, according to the rules governing the service, for promotion to the TGT Punjabi, a candidate

is required to have a graduation degree and also should have 50% marks in the subject of Punjabi, as an elective subject, which requirement is fulfilled

by the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that declining the claim of the petitioner by the respondents for promotion on the reason mentioned is

contrary to the rules governing the service. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has already approached the

respondents by filing a detailed legal notice dated 16.9.2020 (Annexure P-7) bringing out these facts to the notice of the respondents, which is already

still pending consideration with the respondents and the petitioner will be satisfied, at this stage, in case a time bound direction is issued to the

respondents to decide the said legal notice by passing an appropriate speaking order.

Notice of motion.

Ms. Rajni Gupta, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, who has joined the proceedings through video conference, keeping in view the

service of advance copy of petition, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and raises no objection for deciding the legal notice of the

petitioner in a time bound manner by passing an appropriate speaking order.

Without commenting upon the merits of the case or about the entitlement of the petitioner for the relief which has been claimed by her in the legal

notice dated 16.09.2020 (Annexure P-7), the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the legal notice dated

16.09.2020 (Annexure P-7) within a period of one month from the receipt of copy of this order.