Punjab and Haryana High Court
CWP/29364/2026 of INSPECTOR KAMALJEET KAUR AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS on 10 September 2026
COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-29364 of 2026 Date of decision: 10.09.2026 Inspector Kamaljeet Kaur and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: - Mr. Kamaldip Singh Sidhu, Advocate, and Ms.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-29364 of 2026
Date of decision: 10.09.2026
Inspector Kamaljeet Kaur and others
......Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR
Present: -
Mr. Kamaldip Singh Sidhu, Advocate, and
Ms. Kirandeep Kaur, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
Mr. Rohit Ahuja, DAG, Punjab.
NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to consider and grant deemed date promotion to the petitioners in the rank of Inspector of Police from March, 2023 when their non-sportspersons counterparts were promoted as Inspector of Police, by counting the periods spent by the petitioners in active sports duties towards qualifying service for promotion, in terms of the recommendations dated Nil & August, 2023 (Annexures P-9 & P-13) of the Officer's Committee constituted by the DGP, Punjab as well as Special DGP, Armed Bns, Jalandhar, and further for quashing inaction of the respondents in denying promotion solely on
Chandigarh the ground of non-completion of 5 years service under Rule 13.14 of PPR, 1934. Further prayer has been made for directing respondent No.1 to take final decision on the comprehensive recommendations (Annexures P-9 & P-13 respectively) within a time-bound manner.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that for redressal of their grievances, petitioners have sent a representation dated 13.03.2026 (Annexure P-15) to the respondents, which is still pending consideration. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners may be given liberty to supplement the said representation by filing a fresh representation and the same may be considered and disposed of by respondent No.1 in a time-bound manner.
3. Notice of motion.
4. Mr. Rohit Ahuja, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents and has no objection to the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case.
6. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case or the claim being made by the petitioners in the present petition, respondent No.1 is directed to consider and decide the claim made in the representation dated 13.03.2026 (Annexure P-15) and supplementary representation, if any moved by the petitioners within a period of 15 days, in accordance with law, by passing a speaking order,
Chandigarh after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of said representation.
7. The petition stands disposed of. (NAMIT KUMAR) 10.09.2026 JUDGE R.S. Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No
Chandigarh