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.