Jalour Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 9329 P&H

                                                                               2023:PHHC:083788

                               In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana
                                                At Chandigarh

                                                                   CWP-18505-2020 (O&M)
                                                                   Date of Decision:-04.07.2023


                 Jalour Singh and others                                     ... Petitioners

                                                    Versus

                 State of Punjab and others                                   ... Respondents


                 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL

                 Present:-        Mr. Anish Babbar, Advocate for the petitioners.

                                  Ms. Ishma Randhawa, Addl. AG, Punjab.

                                                    *****

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J.(Oral)

1. The petitioners who had been working as Junior Engineers/SDOs, some of

whom had already retired have approached this Court seeking issuance of

writ in the nature of Mandamus so as to remove anomaly in their pay as

respondents No.6 and 7 who were allegedly junior to the petitioners were

getting a pay higher than the petitioners.

2. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also the State

counsel.

3. In the present case, while the petitioners were all diploma holders, the private

respondents were degree holders. It is not in dispute that the rules provide

for different periods of service as Junior Engineer for promotion to the post

of SDO and that while degree holders JEs are entitled for promotion after

they attain experience of 3 years, the Junior Engineer who are diploma

holders are entitled to be considered for promotion after 10 years of service.

MOHAN SINGH 2023.07.04 17:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-18505-2020 (O&M) (2) 2023:PHHC:083788

4. In the present case the private respondents had been promoted on ad-hoc

basis as Sub Divisional Engineers in the year 1987 and were subsequently

promoted against regular posts in the year 2010. The petitioners were

promoted as Sub Divisional Engineers in the year 2010 on the same date. It

is a settled position of law that ad-hoc service is not to count towards the

seniority. However, as per instructions dated 11.5.1990 (Annexure R-2) the

period of service rendered on ad-hoc basis is to count towards benefit of

senior/selection grades, proficiency step-up increment provided against the

promotion quota post. The instructions read as under:

"Counting of ad-hoc service i.e. after provisional promotion against a particular" post for purposes of experience for grant of selection/senior scale/proficiency step up.

It has been brought to the notice of Government that in the case of adhoc promotions i.e. provisional promotions pending approval by the Punjab Public Service Commission to the promotion quota posts which are initially done for a period of 6 months but continue for long period over years. In some of the departments promotion of such employees have not been regularised for a period over 10 years with the result that such period of adhoc/provisional promotion is not considered for extending the benefit of senior/selection grades where such grades are available after putting in specific length of service or proficiency step-up increment, whereas, these benefits are admissible to regular promotees. The matter has also been taken up separately with the Punjab Public Service Commission who are willing to finalize such cases expeditiously.

Alter careful consideration it has been decided that the period of service against promotion on adhoc basis i.e. after provisional promotion, should be taken into account for the

MOHAN SINGH 2023.07.04 17:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-18505-2020 (O&M) (3) 2023:PHHC:083788

purpose of benefit of senior/selection grade/proficiency step up incremtns provided the promotion so ordered is against promotion quota post.

(P.G. No. 7/14,88-5PPI/8369, dated 11th May. 1990)"

5. It is the specific stand of the State that while seniority has not been granted

on the basis of ad-hoc service, but the financial benefits had been protected.

In these circumstances the private respondents having been promoted on ad-

hoc basis more than a decade prior to the year 2010 when the petitioners as

well as the private respondents were promoted on regular basis, the private

respondents would obviously be drawing a higher pay than the petitioners.

In these circumstances, it cannot be said that there is any anomaly in the

fixation of pay of the petitioners.

6. The petition is found to be sans merit and is dismissed.

                 04.07.2023                                       ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL )
                 mohan                                                     JUDGE


                               Whether speaking /reasoned          Yes / No

                               Whether Reportable                  Yes / No




MOHAN SINGH
2023.07.04 17:57
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this
order/judgment