Punjab-Haryana High Court
Hari Krishan Sharma vs State Of Haryana on 11 March, 2024
Author: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:034514
RSA-1652-1997 (O&M) -1- 2024:PHHC:034514
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
204 RSA-1652-1997 (O&M)
Date of Decision :11.03.2024
Hari Krishan Sharma ...Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana ....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Present: Mr. Sahil Mehndiratta, Advocate for the appellant-plaintiff.
Ms. Vibha Tiwari, AAG, Haryana.
***
Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)
1. In the present regular second appeal, challenge is to judgment
and decree of the Courts below by which, the suit filed by the appellant-
plaintiff claiming declaration that adverse remarks recorded in the annual
confidential report of the appellant-plaintiff for the year 1985-86 are illegal
and arbitrary and further prayer of the appellant-plaintiff that he be granted
benefit of increment, has been dismissed.
2. A civil suit filed by the appellant-plaintiff was dismissed by the
trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 02.06.1992 keeping in view the
facts and evidence, which had come on record before the trial Court. Even
the appeal, preferred against the said judgment and decree of the trial Court
dated 02.06.1992 has been dismissed by the lower Appellate Court vide
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:034514
RSA-1652-1997 (O&M) -2- 2024:PHHC:034514
judgment and decree dated 18.02.1997 hence, the present regular second
appeal.
3. On being asked to point out any perversity in the judgment and
decree of the Courts below, learned counsel for the appellant-plaintiff has
started arguing the suit again so as to re-appreciate the evidence, which had
come on record so as to arrive at a different conclusion than the one already
arrived by the Courts below.
4. In the present regular second appeal, only the perversity, if any,
in the findings of the Courts below are to be seen and this Court is not to re-
appreciate the evidence, which had already come on record during the
course of trial so as to record a finding other than the one recorded by the
Courts below.
5. Further, challenge in the suit was with regard to the adverse
remarks recorded in the annual confidential report of the appellant-plaintiff
for the year 1985-86 due to which, appellant-plaintiff was not granted
benefit of annual increment in service. The findings have already been
recorded by the Courts below that the adverse remarks recorded in the
annual confidential report of the appellant-plaintiff for year 1985-86 are
valid. Once recording of adverse remarks is in accordance with law, the said
finding cannot be upset unless it is shown that the same are perverse to the
fact/evidence on record. Learned counsel for the appellant has not been able
to point out any fact/evidence to prove the finding of the Courts below to
be perverse in any manner.
6. Even with regard to the claim of the appellant-plaintiff for the
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:034514
RSA-1652-1997 (O&M) -3- 2024:PHHC:034514
grant of annual increment, findings have been recorded that appellant-
plaintiff was appointed on consolidated salary of Rs.100/- and there was no
such term & condition in the appointment order that he will be entitled for
increment on the said consolidated fixed salary.
7. That being the findings recorded by the Courts below and as no
perversity has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant-
plaintiff in the same hence, the present regular second appeal is dismissed.
8. Civil Miscellaneous application pending, if any, is also
disposed of.
March 11, 2024 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
aarti JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:034514
3 of 3
