IN T 105 Jaswindeer Sh. Manji Governmen CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GU order dated this Court Punjab and COCP-1162-2026 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR COCP No.1162 of Date of decision : indeer Singh Versus Manjit Singh Brar, IAS, Additiona rnment Department, Punjab and other AM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH Mr. Dhiraj Chawla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Manmeet Singh Teji, AAG P Shri Sandeep Kang, Sr. Assistan Punjab. Mr. Sarbuland Singh Mann, Adv for respondent No.3. I GUPTA J. (Oral) Present contempt petition has be dated 07.8.2025 (Annexure P-1) passe ourt in CWP-22784-2025 titled as “J b and others”, whereby it was observed a “xxx xxx xxx 10. In view of the afo the Division Bench of thi held that even after retire to be considered for n petition is allowed and th P-5), rejecting the claim aside. Accordingly, resp consider case of the petit 1 UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH 162 of 2026 (O & M) sion :-16.03.2026 …..Petitioner itional Chief Secretary, Local others …..Respondents NIDHI GUPTA AAG Punjab assisted by ssistant, Local Govt.-2 Branch, n, Advocate has been filed alleging violation of passed by a co-ordinate Bench of as “Jaswinder Singh vs. State of rved and directed as follows :- aforesaid judgment rendered by f this Court, wherein it has been etirement, an employee is entitled or notional promotion, present nd the impugned order (Annexure aim of the petitioner, is hereby set respondent No.3 is directed to petitioner for notional promotion VIJAY ASIJA 2026.03.19 09.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document filed the ins dated 07.7.2 as Trust E 07.8.2025 th of the petiti the petitione to the Writ passed whe rejected by Governmen others (Di suitability o to be cons contended t Dr. Amal S submissions of the petiti dated 10.3.2 COCP-1162-2026 (O & M) to the post of Trust accordance with law. 11. It is made clear t suitable to be promoted (Horticulture), he be p notionally and other ben granted to him, within a p date of receipt of certified xxx xxx xxx” To give a brief background of the instant writ petition seeking writ of ce 07.7.2025, whereby the claim of the peti rust Engineer had been rejected. Vi 025 the said order was set aside and it w petitioner be considered and “if the peti titioner be promoted to the post of Trust Learned counsel for the petition Writ Court order, an order dated 10.3.2 d whereby case of the petitioner for n ed by placing reliance on the judgment o rnment of West Bengal and others v (Diary No.43488 of 2023). Lear ility of the petitioner as directed by the considered by the respondents has nded that the said judgment of the Hon’ mal Satpathi (supra) is not applicable to Learned counsel for the respond ions advanced on behalf of the petitio petitioner has been duly considered and 10.3.2026 (Annexure P-3) has been pas 2 ust Engineer (Horticulture), in ar that if the petitioner is found ted to the post of Trust Engineer be promoted to the said post benefits accruing therefrom be n a period of two months from the tified copy of this order. nd of the case, the petitioner had it of certiorari for quashing of order he petitioner for notional promotion . Vide Writ Court order dated nd it was further directed that case he petitioner is found suitable” then Trust Engineer (Horticulture). etitioner submits that in pursuance 10.3.2026 (Annexure P-3) has been for notional promotion has been ment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in hers vs. Dr. Amal Satpathi and Learned counsel contends that y the Writ Court and as was bound has not been considered. It is Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of able to the facts of the present case. espondents vehemently oppose the petitioner and submit that the case ed and thereafter a Speaking Order en passed. Learned counsel for the VIJAY ASIJA 2026.03.19 09.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document respondents (Annexure P COCP-1162-2026 (O & M) ndents refer to para Nos.5 and 6 of the exure P-3), which read as under :- “5. For compliance Government referred the Advocate General, Pun Advocate General's offi comments: In order to apprec reference may be Hon'ble Supreme C Bengal & others v (Diary No. 43488 Court observed: Whil to be consi Articles 14 of India, he right to p becomes employee promotiona of occur recommend had superan was effect retrospectiv promotiona Ther judgment, i petitioner i particularly duties on th already re post was Departmen 6 Since till the re 31.05.2024 the post of T did not exist in the Trust notice dated 15.11.2024 promotion to the post of T was considered by the filed/closed. In view of th Advocate General, Punj Jaswinder Singh, A 3 the said order dated 10.3.2026 ce of the above orders, the the matter to the office of the Punjab for legal opinion. The office has given the following preciate the controversy involved, be made to the judgment of the me Court in Government of West rs vs. Dr. Amal Satpathi & others 488 of 2023), wherein the Hon'ble While the respondent has a right considered for promotion under s 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution a, he does not have an absolute to promotion itself. Promotion s effective only when the ee assumes duties on the ional post, and not from the date ccurrence of vacancy or endation. Since the respondent erannuated before the promotion ffected, he is not entitled to ective financial benefits of the ional post. Therefore, relying on the above nt, it can be concluded that the er is not entitled to the claim, larly when he did not assume n the promotional post, as he had retired before the sanctioned as given effect to by the ment. e retirement of the officer on of Trust Engineer (Horticulture) rust Service Rules, 2015, the legal 024 regarding grant of notional st of Trust Engineer (Horticulture) the competent authority and of the legal opinion given by the Punjab, the claim made by Sh. Assistant Trust Engineer VIJAY ASIJA 2026.03.19 09.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document stands duly the record. respondents 10.3.2026 (A 07.8.2025 (A contempt pe dated 10.3.2 remedy as p March 16, 2 Vijay Asija Whether spe Whether Rep COCP-1162-2026 (O & M) (Horticulture) (Retired) found to be admissible/co It is contended that, accordingly s duly complied with in letter and spirit. I have heard learned counsel for cord. In view of the submissions mad ndents and the aforementioned paras 026 (Annexure P-3) as reproduced abov 025 (Annexure P-1) stands duly complie petition stands dismissed. Rule stands discharged. Needless to say, if the petition 10.3.2026 (Annexure P-3), it is open y as per law. Pending application(s), if any, sh , 2026 Asija er speaking/reasoned Yes / No er Reportable Yes / No 4 ed) regarding promotion is not le/considerable.” dingly, the order of the Writ Court pirit. sel for the parties and gone through made by learned counsel for the aras 5 and 6 of the order dated d above, the Writ Court order dated omplied with, therefore, the present etitioner is aggrieved of the order open for him to seek appropriate any, shall stand(s) disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2026.03.19 09.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document