Punjab-Haryana High Court
Yash Paul Sharma vs State Of Punjab And Another on 5 July, 2022
CWP-13116-2020 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
257 CWP-13116-2020
Date of Decision :05.07.2022
Yash Paul Sharma
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Present: Mr. Rajat Khanna, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Navdeep Chhabra, DAG, Punjab.
***
Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)
In the present writ petition, the claim of the petitioner is that he
had discharged the duty of higher post of Tehsildar for a period starting
from 19.05.2005 to 08.04.2013, hence, he is entitled for the grant of salary
of the post of Tehsildar, on which post, he had discharged the duties.
As per the averments made in the present writ petition, the
petitioner was appointed as Naib Tehsildar on 08.11.1993 and the next
promotion from the post of Naib Tehsildar is that of Tehsildar and as 20
posts of Tehsildars were lying vacant and work was suffering, Naib
Tehsildars including the petitioner were given current duty charge of the
post of Tehsildar by the respondents vide order dated 19.05.2005 (Annexure
P/1) along with other Naib Tehsildars. The petitioner continued working on
the post of Tehsildar on current duty charge for a period of approximately
08 years till he was regularly promoted on the said post of Tehsildar on
08.04.2013 and ultimately retired on 31.12.2015. Prayer of the petitioner in
the present writ petition is that the petitioner be given benefit of the pay of
1 of 3
the post of Tehsildar for a period, for which, he had discharged the duty of
the said post on current duty charge, which benefit has been declined to him
by the respondents vide order dated 04.12.2020 (Annexure P/6), which
order has been impugned in the present petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the case of the
petitioner is covered by the judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of this
Court in CWP-24018-2015 titled as Kanwar Narinder Singh and others
vs. State of Punjab and another on 03.12.2018 as the other similarly
situated employees, who were also given the current duty charge of the post
of Tehsildar on 19.05.2005 and were ultimately regularised on the said post
on 08.04.2013 along with the petitioner, have already been extended the
benefit as being prayed by the petitioner in the present writ petition. The
order passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Kanwar Narinder
Singh's case (Supra) has already been implemented by the respondent-
department for similarly situated colleagues of the petitioner, who also
discharged the duties on current duty charge on the post of Tehsildar before
being regularly appointed.
After notice of motion, the respondents have filed reply and
have conceded the factual position that the petitioner along with other Naib
Tehsildars has been given current duty charge of the higher post of
Tehsildar on 19.05.2005 on which post, he continued working for a period
of eight years and was promoted on the said post on 08.04.2013 and
ultimately retired on 31.12.2015. It has further been mentioned in the reply
that it is only in the case, where an employee discharged duties on two
posts, he is entitled for the benefit of pay of higher post but, in the present
case, the petitioner had only discharged duty of the post of Tehsildar on the
2 of 3
basis of current duty charge and, therefore, he cannot be granted benefit of
the post of Tehsildar Learned State counsel conceded the fact that the case
of the petitioner is covered by the judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench
of this Court in Kanwar Narinder Singh's case (supra) as the claim of the
petitioners therein was identical as that of petitioner in the present petition
and they have already been granted the said benefit by the respondents as
being prayed by the petitioner in the present petition.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone
through the record with their able assistance.
Once, it is a conceded position before this Court that the
similarly situated employees i.e. petitioners in Kanwar Narinder Singh's
case (supra) have already been granted the benefit of pay of the post of
Tehsildar by a Coordinate Bench of this Court for the period they
discharged the duties of the said post on current duty charge, which relief is
being prayed by the petitioner in the present petition and the order passed in
Kanwar Narinder Singh's case (supra) has already been implemented by
the respondent-State, the claim of the petitioner is to be allowed on the same
ground itself.
In view of the above, the present petition is also allowed in
terms of the order passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Kanwar
Narinder Singh's case (supra).
July 05, 2022 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
aarti JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
