Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sarwan Singh & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 6 March, 2024
Author: Vikas Bahl
Bench: Vikas Bahl
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032480
CWP-5643-2017 1 2024:PHHC:032480
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
***
1. CWP-5643-2017
Sarwan Singh and others
... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
... Respondents
2. CWP-5644-2017
Balkar Singh and others
... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
... Respondents
3. CWP-5645-2017
Balbir Singh and others
... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
... Respondents
4. CWP-5646-2017
Johar Singh and others
... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
... Respondents
1 of 5
::: Downloaded on - 08-03-2024 03:35:52 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032480
CWP-5643-2017 2 2024:PHHC:032480
5. CWP-13488-2017
Harbhajan Singh and others
... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
... Respondents
Date of decision : 06.03.2024
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr.Neeraj Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr.Arjun Sheoran, DAG, Punjab.
Ms.Richa Sharma, Advocate for
Mr. Amar Vivek, Advocate
for respondent no.4 in CWP-5645-2017.
VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL)
1. This order will dispose of five writ petitions i.e., CWP-5643-
2017 filed by Sarwan Singh and others, CWP-5644-2017 filed by Balkar
Singh and others, CWP-5645-2017 filed by Balbir Singh and others, CWP-
5646-2017 filed by Johar Singh and others and CWP-13488-2017 filed by
Harbhajan Singh and others.
2. The prayer made in all the writ petitions is for issuance of a
writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to count the work
charge service of the petitioners followed by regularization for the purposes
of determination of total length of service for grant of proficiency step up /
Assured Career Progression Scheme.
3. On 25.04.2017, a Coordinate Bench of this Court was pleased
to pass the following order:-
"Contends that in similar writ petition bearing CWP No.25913 of
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032480
CWP-5643-2017 3 2024:PHHC:032480
2015 involving identical issues notice of motion has been issued
and the same stands listed for hearing on 04.9.2017.
Notice of motion for 04.9.2017.
A photo copy of this order be placed in the file on all the
connected files.
April 25,2017 (JASWANT SINGH)
JUDGE"
3. Learned counsel for the respondents has pointed out that the
said writ petition i.e. CWP-25913-2015 has been dismissed by the
Coordinate Bench of this Court vide detailed order dated 03.10.2023. The
relevant portion of which is highlighted and is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"31. In any case, the State of Punjab itself in its clarificatory letter
dated 1.9.1989 had in unambiguous terms clarified that the service
rendered on work-charge basis is not to count for grant of
proficiency step-up. The said relevant extract from the said letter
dated 1.9.1989 is reproduced herein-under :-
"Sub: Clarification in respect of grant of proficiency step-up(s).
Sir,
In continuation of Punjab Government Instructions issued vide
circular letter No.7/14/88-5 PPI/2269/18527, dated Ist December,
1988 and subsequent letter No. 7/14/88-5PPI/14688 dated 9th
August, 1989 regarding the grant of proficiency step-up(s), I am
directed to say that various departments/officies have raised
certain points for clarification in respect of grant of proficiency
step-up, the procedure for which was laid down in the letter dated
1.12.88, the matter has been considered in detail in consultation
with the Department of Finance and the following clarifications
are given on the various points :-
Points Clarification
6 An employee was appointed on adhoc 6 The period of eight or eighteen
basis wherein he had put in 3 years of years is to be reckoned from the
service. Subsequently, he was appointed date of appointment on regular
on regular basis. For the grant of basis Service rendered on adhoc
Proficiency whether the period 8/18 years basis is not to be counted for the
is to be taken from the date of his purpose of grant of proficiency
appointment on adhoc basis or from the step-up(s).
date he joined on regular basis as
appointed by the Subordinate Services
Selection Board/ Departmental Selection
Committee Punjab/ Punjab Public Service
Commission
32. The above consistent view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court does
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032480
CWP-5643-2017 4 2024:PHHC:032480
not leave any room for taking a different view and it stands well
settled that service rendered on work-charge basis prior to
regularization of an employee is not to be counted for the purpose
of grant of benefits like increment of proficiency step-up upon
completion of 8 and 18 years of service etc., unless the
rules/policies of the State specifically permits for the same. There
being no such policy prevalent, the petitioners cannot stake their
claim so as to seek benefit of proficiency step-up by counting his
service rendered on workcharge basis. The judgment of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Jasmer Singh's case, wherein policy relied upon
by the petitioner i.e. policy dated 1.12.1988 (Annexure P-1), has
been interpreted, coupled with clarificatory letter dated 1.9.1989
(Annexure P-2), make it crystal clear that service rendered on ad-
hoc/work-charge basis by the petitioners, prior to their
regularisartion cannot be counted towards grant of proficiency
step-up increments.
33. Rather, this Court is of the opinion that granting such benefits
would have wide ramifications and would lead to multiplicity of
litigation inasmuch as the persons who may have been appointed
directly shortly before the petitioners were made regular would be
drawing a lesser salary whereas the petitioners on the strength of
their service rendered on work-charge basis would be drawing a
higher salary. The same would be an anomalous situation which
should be avoided.
34. Finding no merit in the petition, the same is hereby dismissed."
Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that in view
of the said judgment, the present petitions, where identical issues are
involved, also deserve to be dismissed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has fairly submitted that the
matter is covered by the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench in CWP-
25913-2015 titled as "Ranjit Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and
others", decided on 03.10.2023.
5. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances, all the
writ petitions are dismissed in view of the judgment passed by the
Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP-25913-2015 titled as "Ranjit
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032480
CWP-5643-2017 5 2024:PHHC:032480
Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others", decided on 03.10.2023.
(VIKAS BAHL)
JUDGE
March 06, 2024
Davinder Kumar
Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:032480
5 of 5
