131 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-19877-2026 Date of Decision : 06.07.2026 GURJANT KAUR .....Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present : Mr. R.K.Handa, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Karnail Singh, Advocate, Ms. Gauri Handa, Advocate and Mr. Rupinder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(Oral) 1. Through the instant petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, a prayer is made for issuance of a direction upon the respondents to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to participate in the selection process of selecting the vacant stations falling in her district and to allot her a new station on the same terms and conditions from the date of initial joining with all consequential benefits. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was given promotion from Master cadre to Lecturer Cadre in the year 2024, and thereafter, she was offered a list of few selective schools, for the purpose of her posting accordingly. It is further contended that the schools included in the said list are situated at a distance ranging from approximately 30-100 kilometres from the residence of the petitioner. DHARAM VIR 2026.07.07 12:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-19877-2026 -2-

3. The case of the petitioner, as set up before this Court, is that despite the availability of vacancies in schools situated closer to her residence, the said schools were not included in the list offered to her for exercising her option for posting. 4. The grievance which has impelled the petitioner to approach this Court is that certain Lecturers, who stand on the same footing as the petitioner, having also been promoted in the year 2024, were afforded a fresh opportunity in 2025–2026 to re-exercise their choice of station, and pursuant thereto, they were allotted stations situated nearer to their respective places of residence, whereas no such opportunity was extended to the petitioner. 5. The grievance of the petitioner, at this stage, is that she submitted a detailed representation dated 30.05.2026 (Annexure P-2), setting out the difficulties being faced by her and seeking redressal of the same. However, despite the lapse of considerable time, no decision has been taken thereon by the competent authority till date. 6. It is contended that, as per the Litigation Policy of the State of Punjab, the authority concerned, being seized of the matter, is required to decide the representation within a period of six weeks. However, despite the expiry of the stipulated period, no decision has been taken thereon till date. 7. On the other hand, Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, AAG, Punjab, who is present in Court, on an advance notice, submits that he has no objection, DHARAM VIR

2026.07.07 12:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-19877-2026 -3- if a direction is passed upon respondents, to decide the representation (supra), in a time bound manner. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in view of the ongoing transfer drive, the vacant posts in the concerned schools are likely to be filled before 15.07.2026. Therefore, he prays that the petitioner's representation be decided expeditiously. 9. In view of the aforesaid, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondents to consider and decide the representation (supra) by passing a reasoned and speaking order, after affording the petitioner an adequate opportunity of hearing, well before 15.07.2026. 10. It goes without saying that in case the respondents, fail to pass a speaking order within the stipulated time period, the petitioner would be at liberty to get the instant petition revived, by filing an apposite application. 11. Learned State counsel is directed to forthwith communicate the aforesaid directions to the competent respondent-authorities to ensure due compliance thereof. 12. Disposed of accordingly. 13. All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (KULDEEP TIWARI) July 06, 2026 JUDGE dharamvir Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No DHARAM VIR 2026.07.07 12:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

131 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-19877-2026 Date of Decision : 06.07.2026 GURJANT KAUR .....Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present : Mr. R.K.Handa, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Karnail Singh, Advocate, Ms. Gauri Handa, Advocate and Mr. Rupinder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(Oral) 1. Through the instant petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, a prayer is made for issuance of a direction upon the respondents to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to participate in the selection process of selecting the vacant stations falling in her district and to allot her a new station on the same terms and conditions from the date of initial joining with all consequential benefits. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was given promotion from Master cadre to Lecturer Cadre in the year 2024, and thereafter, she was offered a list of few selective schools, for the purpose of her posting accordingly. It is further contended that the schools included in the said list are situated at a distance ranging from approximately 30-100 kilometres from the residence of the petitioner. DHARAM VIR 2026.07.07 12:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-19877-2026 -2-

3. The case of the petitioner, as set up before this Court, is that despite the availability of vacancies in schools situated closer to her residence, the said schools were not included in the list offered to her for exercising her option for posting. 4. The grievance which has impelled the petitioner to approach this Court is that certain Lecturers, who stand on the same footing as the petitioner, having also been promoted in the year 2024, were afforded a fresh opportunity in 2025–2026 to re-exercise their choice of station, and pursuant thereto, they were allotted stations situated nearer to their respective places of residence, whereas no such opportunity was extended to the petitioner. 5. The grievance of the petitioner, at this stage, is that she submitted a detailed representation dated 30.05.2026 (Annexure P-2), setting out the difficulties being faced by her and seeking redressal of the same. However, despite the lapse of considerable time, no decision has been taken thereon by the competent authority till date. 6. It is contended that, as per the Litigation Policy of the State of Punjab, the authority concerned, being seized of the matter, is required to decide the representation within a period of six weeks. However, despite the expiry of the stipulated period, no decision has been taken thereon till date. 7. On the other hand, Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, AAG, Punjab, who is present in Court, on an advance notice, submits that he has no objection, DHARAM VIR

2026.07.07 12:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-19877-2026 -3- if a direction is passed upon respondents, to decide the representation (supra), in a time bound manner. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in view of the ongoing transfer drive, the vacant posts in the concerned schools are likely to be filled before 15.07.2026. Therefore, he prays that the petitioner's representation be decided expeditiously. 9. In view of the aforesaid, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondents to consider and decide the representation (supra) by passing a reasoned and speaking order, after affording the petitioner an adequate opportunity of hearing, well before 15.07.2026. 10. It goes without saying that in case the respondents, fail to pass a speaking order within the stipulated time period, the petitioner would be at liberty to get the instant petition revived, by filing an apposite application. 11. Learned State counsel is directed to forthwith communicate the aforesaid directions to the competent respondent-authorities to ensure due compliance thereof. 12. Disposed of accordingly. 13. All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (KULDEEP TIWARI) July 06, 2026 JUDGE dharamvir Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No DHARAM VIR 2026.07.07 12:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document