Punjab-Haryana High Court
Punsup & Ors vs Laju Ram & Ors on 15 April, 2024
Author: Suvir Sehgal
Bench: Suvir Sehgal
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:050028
2024:PHHC:050028
RSA-907-1994 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(219-1) RSA-907-1994 (O&M)
Date of decision:- 15.04.2024
Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation, Chandigarh and another
... Appellants
Versus
Laju Ram and others ...Respondents
(219-2) RSA-908-1994 (O&M)
Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation, Chandigarh and another
... Appellants
Versus
Sukhdev Raj and others ...Respondents
(219-3) RSA-909-1994 (O&M)
Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation, Chandigarh and another
... Appellants
Versus
Ajit Raj and others ...Respondents
(219-4) RSA-910-1994 (O&M)
Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation, Chandigarh and another
... Appellants
Versus
Buta Ram and others ...Respondents
(219-5) RSA-911-1994 (O&M)
Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation, Chandigarh and another
... Appellants
Versus
Swarn Singh and others ...Respondents
1 of 4
::: Downloaded on - 20-04-2024 08:16:22 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:050028
2024:PHHC:050028
RSA-907-1994 (O&M) -2-
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
Present:- Mr. H.S.Randhawa, Advocate
for the appellants in all the cases.
None for the respondent(s).
****
SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (ORAL)
1. This order shall dispose of five cases bearing Nos. RSA-907-
1994 titled as "Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation, Chandigarh and
another Versus Laju Ram and others", RSA-908-1994 titled as "Punjab
State Civil Supplies Corporation, Chandigarh and another Versus
Sukhdev Raj and others", RSA-909-1994 titled as "Punjab State Civil
Supplies Corporation, Chandigarh and another Versus Ajit Raj and
others", RSA-910-1994 titled as "Punjab State Civil Supplies
Corporation, Chandigarh and another Versus Buta Ram and others" and
RSA-911-1994 titled as "Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation,
Chandigarh and another Versus Swarn Singh and others", as they
involved, same question of law and facts.
2. For the sake of convenience, facts are being taken from RSA-
907-1994.
3. Defendants-appellants are in second appeal before this Court
challenging the concurrent finding of fact recorded by both the Courts
below.
4. Pleaded case of the plaintiff-respondent No.1, Laju Ram, is that
he was working as a Peon and was entitled to be promoted to the post of
Clerk-cum-Typist. He claimed that defendants No. 4 to 7, who were
similarly placed, were promoted ignoring the plaintiff. It has been averred
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:050028
2024:PHHC:050028
RSA-907-1994 (O&M) -3-
that although there is a requirement of passing a departmental test for
promotion, but he could not appear in the test as the date of the test was
communicated after the test had been conducted. Civil Suit for declaration
was filed by him for promotion to the post of Clerk-cum-Typist w.e.f.
21.11.1990, when his juniors were promoted.
5. Upon notice, written statement was filed by the defendants
contesting the suit on the ground that the plaintiff does not possess the
necessary qualification and had not passed the requisite typing test. A
replication was filed by the plaintiff re-asserting the claim. On the basis of
the pleadings of the parties, issues were framed and by judgment on
12.01.1993, Trial Court decreed the suit. Defendants remained unsuccessful
in the first appeal, which was rejected by judgment dated 04.01.1994,
resulting in the institution of the instant second appeal.
6. Counsel for the appellants has argued that the lower Appellate
Court has dismissed the appeal as not properly instituted on the ground that
no separate resolution had been passed by the appellants in favour of the
District Manager authorizing him to file the appeal. He submits that the
judgment relied upon by the lower Appellate Court has been over-ruled.
7. I have heard counsel for the appellants and examined the record
with his able assistance.
8. While dismissing the appeal, learned Additional District Judge,
Gurdaspur has placed reliance upon a judgment of this Court in Garib
Chand Versus Municipal Committee, Budhlada, 1979 PLR 527. The
correctness of law laid down in Garib Chand's case (supra) came up for
consideration before this Court in Municipal Committee, Bhatinda Versus
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:050028
2024:PHHC:050028
RSA-907-1994 (O&M) -4-
Sadhu Singh, 1986 (2) PLR 1, wherein this judgment has been specifically
over-ruled. The Division Bench has held as under:-
"9. It will thus be seen from a perusal of the aforementioned
judgments that in none of them it has been laid down that besides
passing a resolution deciding to file an appeal, the Municipal
Committee must necessarily pass a separate resolution vesting
authority in the Executive Officer to file the same. The ratio of all
these judgments is that before filing an appeal a corporate body
like the Municipal Committee must pass a resolution deciding to
file the same. We have no quarrel with this proposition of law.
10. For the reasons discussed above, we are unable to
subscribe to the view taken by the Single Bench in Garib Chand's
case (supra) and resultantly overrule the same. We hold that once
the Municipal Committee decides to file an appeal by passing a
resolution, its Executive Officer is empowered to file the same by
virtue of Section 4 of the Act."
9. As the judicial precedent on which reliance has been placed by
the First Appellate Court had been over-ruled, the judgment passed by the
learned Additional District Judge cannot be sustained and is hereby set
aside.
10. The first appeal has not been decided on merits. Therefore, the
matter is remitted to the learned District Judge, Gurdaspur to decide the
appeal afresh after hearing the parties. Learned District Judge, Gurdaspur
may adjudicate the matter himself or assign it to any other Court of
competent jurisdiction.
11. Accordingly, all the five appeals are allowed.
12. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
15.04.2024 (SUVIR SEHGAL)
Kamal JUDGE
Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
4 of 4
