OM PATI HOODA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking quashing of the order dated 27.6 -1983, 10.10.1983 and 6.6.1988, Annexure P/3, P/5 and P/6 respectively. In the prayer clause, the petitioner has not prayed for promotion, however, in the opening page of the writ petition, such prayer of promoting her to the post of Director Physical Education (for short D.P.E.) w.e.f. 27.6.1983 has been made.

(2.) ANNEXURE P/3 is the promotion order of respondent No. 4. By order annexure P/5, representation of the petitioner was rejected and vide annexure P/6, appeal filed by the petitioner was also rejected.

(3.) THE official respondents have taken a stand in their written statement that respondent No. 4 having passed the diploma in Physical Education earlier in the year 1973, she stood senior and had to be considered earlier than the petitioner for promotion. This is stated by the respondents in paragraph No. 4 of the written statement. In paragraph 4, the official respondents have inter -alia stated as under : -