122 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-22978-2026 Date of decision: 27.07.2026 Narender Kumar ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Tejpal Singh Dhull, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl.A.G., Haryana. HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) 1. The present civil writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the action of the respondents not to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Principal under the letter dated 24.06.2026 (Annexure P-5) and the provisional seniority list dated 01.01.2026 (Annexure P-3) as well as the proceedings under the letter dated 24.06.2026 (Annexure P-5) to the extent that the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Principal has not been considered despite being senior to many persons. Further, for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider and promote the petitioner to the post of Principal along with the persons junior to the petitioner and to release all the consequential benefits to the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the provisional seniority list was circulated on 27.02.2026, wherein, the petitioner NEHA 2026.07.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-22978-2026 -2- was shown at serial No.434 by mentioning an incorrect date of joining. The petitioner submitted a representation dated 12.03.2026 (Annexure P-4) seeking correction of the date of appointment in the seniority list. In the meantime, vide letter dated 24.06.2026 (Annexure P-5), applications were invited for promotion to the post of Principal from the PGT cadre, wherein, 4% reservation is provided for PwD candidates. The seniority list circulated on 04.07.2026 correctly reflects the petitioner's date of appointment, however, applications were invited on the basis of the incorrect seniority list circulated on 27.02.2026. It is contended that, in case the cases for promotion are considered on the basis of the corrected seniority list, the petitioner would fall within the zone of consideration, as against 15 posts reserved for visually handicapped candidates, the petitioner stands at serial No.11. Despite being senior, the petitioner's case is not being considered for promotion. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has limited his prayer to the extent that the present petition be treated as a comprehensive representation and the same be decided in a time bound manner by passing a speaking order after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. 4. Notice of motion. 5. Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl.A.G., Haryana puts in appearance and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, it transpires that the petitioner’s grievance regarding correction of his date of appointment stands redressed, as the tentative seniority list issued on 04.07.2026 correctly reflects the petitioner’s date of appointment. However, NEHA 2026.07.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CWP-22978-2026 -3- the petitioner has a valid grievance with regard to his right to be considered for promotion in the respective category reserved for Persons with Disabilities. Certainly, prejudice would be caused to the petitioner in case the promotions are made in terms of letter dated 24.06.2026 (Annexure P-5), which was issued on the basis of the seniority list dated 27.02.2026. 7. In view of the admitted facts, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion on the basis of the seniority list reflecting his correct date of appointment. In case the petitioner is found eligible for promotion in terms of his seniority, his case shall be considered and a reasoned and speaking order shall be passed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The decision so taken shall be conveyed to the petitioner. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 27.07.2026 Neha Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No NEHA 2026.07.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh