Punjab-Haryana High Court
Dharampal vs State Of Haryana And Others on 14 March, 2024
Author: Jasgurpreet Singh Puri
Bench: Jasgurpreet Singh Puri
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:037783
CWP-40-2020 1 2024:PHHC:037783
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
239 CWP-40-2020 (O&M)
Date of Decision:14.03.2024
Dharampal
.......Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
.....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI
Present:- Mr. A.K. Virdi, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Kapil Bansal, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Pritam Singh Saini, Advocate and
Mr. Sanjay Saini, Advocate for the respondents-Nigam.
*****
JASGURPREET SINGH PURI J.(Oral)
1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of
Mandamus/Certiorari directing the respondents to pay the difference of
salary from 17.02.2015 to 26.10.2018 by which the petitioner discharged
and worked on the post of SDO.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner was working as a Junior Engineer in the office of respondents-
Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam (hereinafter to be referred to 'Nigam')
and vide Annexure P-7 dated 17.02.2015, he was given current duty charge
for discharging the duties on the post of SDO. He further submitted that
thereafter, the petitioner continuously worked and discharged his duties on
the post of SDO w.e.f. 17.02.2015 and subsequently he was promoted to
1 of 2
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:037783
CWP-40-2020 2 2024:PHHC:037783
the aforesaid post on 26.10.2018. He further submitted that prayer in the
present petition is for grant of difference of salary for the aforesaid period
i.e. from 17.02.2015 to 26.10.2018 which has been denied to the petitioner
by the respondents-Nigam. He further submitted that the case of the
petitioner is covered by a judgment passed by this Court bearing No.
CWP-23003-2018 on 08.01.2024 .
3. Learned counsel for the respondents has not been able to
controvert the fact that the prayer made in the present petition is covered by
the aforesaid judgement passed by this Court in CWP-23003-2018 decided
on 08.01.2024.
4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the
view that the petition is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgement
passed by this Court in CWP-23003-2018 decided on 08.01.2024. It is a
settled law that an employee who discharges the duties at the higher post on
the basis of orders passed by the employer, he has to be paid the salary for
the said post.
5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, present petition
is hereby allowed. The respondents-Nigam are directed to pay the
difference of salary from 17.02.2015 till 26.10.2018 to the petitioner for
the period he discharged his duties as an SDO on current duty charge basis
within a period of three months alongwith interest @6% per annum.
(JASGURPREET SINGH PURI)
JUDGE
14.03.2024
shweta
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
2 of 2
