IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 110 CWP-22244-2026 Date of Decision : 23.07.2026 Lakhvir Singh and others …..Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present : Mr. Rajeev Kawatra, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rohit Ahuja, D.A.G., Punjab. **** NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioners have filed the instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a writ of certiorari for modifying the promotion order dated 25.03.2025 (Annexure P-9), passed by respondent No.3, to the limited extent that it grants promotion to the petitioners as Head Constables from the actual dates of their entitlement under the 10% C-II (Exemptee) quota rather than from the date of the order. Further, seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the petitioners retrospective promotion to the rank of Head Constable w.e.f. the dates other similarly placed persons and their juniors/lesser eligible persons were promoted along with all consequential benefits including seniority, back-wages and pay fixation and to depute the petitioners to the upcoming Intermediate School Course batch starting on 20.07.2026 (Annexure P-11) or reserve 3 seats for them during the pendency of the instant petition. Further, to declare standing order dated 23.04.2022 VINOD KOTHIYAL 2026.07.23 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP-22244-2026 2 (Annexure P-8), issued by respondent No.1, as inapplicable/void to the extent that it attempts to override the statutory Rule 13.8(2) of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 without a formal legislative amendment. 2. During the course of hearing, learned State counsel has pointed out that the petitioners had earlier filed CWP No.17671 of 2023 (Gauravdeep Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others), which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 29.11.2023 (Annexure P- 5) by passing the following order :- “1. The petitioners are seeking issuance of direction to the respondents to promote the petitioner on the post of Head Constable under C-II category as they are entitled for promotion upto 10 % of the vacancies of the Constable. In alternative, the petitioners are praying that they may be permitted for ‘Lower School Course’ so that they may secure position of C-I category. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, waives his claim qua promotion on the basis of Rule 13.8 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934, however, he prays that petitioners may be promoted and sent for ‘Lower School Course’ so that they may achieve the status of C-I category. 3. Learned State counsel submits that the petitioners cannot be promoted prior to achieving C-I category and for the said purpose they are supposed to undergo ‘Lower School Course’. He further submits that the petitioners would be considered for ‘Lower School Course’ at the earliest available opportunity and after completion of ‘Lower School Course’, they would be considered for promotion. He also confirms that the question of promotion of the petitioners would be considered in accordance with law. VINOD KOTHIYAL 2026.07.23 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP-22244-2026 3 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner agrees with the aforesaid arrangement. 5. In the wake of statement of learned counsel for both the parties, the present petition stands disposed of.” 3. Learned State counsel further submits that the petitioners had already given up their claim to promote them to the post of Head Constable under C-II category and prayed in the abovesaid petition that they may be sent to the Lower School Course so that they may secure their position in C-1 category. He further submits that in pursuance to the abovesaid order, the petitioners had already deputed to the Lower School Course and their names have been enlisted in C-1 category and have been promoted as Head Constable, vide order dated 25.03.2025 (Annexure P-9). 4. Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioners wishes to withdraw the instant petition. 5. Dismissed as withdrawn. 23.07.2026 (NAMIT KUMAR) Kothiyal JUDGE Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No VINOD KOTHIYAL 2026.07.23 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document