UNION OF INDIA Vs. TARSEN LAL
LAWS(SC)-2006-9-48
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: PUNJAB & HARYANA)
Decided on September 21,2006

UNION OF INDIA Appellant
VERSUS
TARSEN LAL Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI VS. SATPAL SINGH [LAWS(DLH)-2012-3-214] [REFERRED TO]
UOI VS. CHHEDI LAL [LAWS(DLH)-2010-9-169] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. D.E.GODGHATE [LAWS(BOM)-2021-2-260] [REFERRED TO]
RANJIT SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2011-8-535] [REFERRED]
THE STATE OF PUNJAB THROUGH COLLECTOR AND ANR. VS. RAJ KUMAR AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2011-5-294] [REFERRED TO]
THE STATE OF PUNJAB THROUGH COLLECTOR AND ANR. VS. RAJ KUMAR AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2011-5-294] [REFERRED TO]
NAND LAL JANGID VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-9-204] [REFERRED]
HARYANA STATE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING BOARD PANCHKULA VS. MAHA SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-2010-5-56] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. RAM SUKHPAL SINGH [LAWS(MEGH)-2014-12-4] [REFERRED TO]
SULTAN SINGH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-8-179] [REFERRED TO]
M.R. BHARDWAJ VS. DELHI STATE COOP. BANK LTD. [LAWS(DLH)-2013-3-220] [REFERRED TO]
TALESHKUMAR MAGANBHAI PATEL AND ORS. VS. AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS. [LAWS(GJH)-2015-6-123] [REFERRED TO]
RAMNIK KUMAR AND ANR. VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2008-10-112] [REFERRED TO]
BALRAJ SINGH AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2008-10-113] [REFERRED TO]
PADMANABHA BHASKARAN PILLAI VS. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA [LAWS(MPH)-2012-3-58] [REFERRED TO]
INTER UNIVERSITY ACCELERATOR CENTRE VS. MANISHA RANI [LAWS(DLH)-2023-8-104] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS VS. GULABSINH SHAMBUBHAI BARAD DRIVER PASSENGER UNDER CCR & ORS [LAWS(GJH)-2011-8-266] [REFERRED TO]
SWAPAN KUMAR CHATTERJEE VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(JHAR)-2017-5-102] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. MANIK LAL CHAKRABORTY [LAWS(GAU)-2022-5-7] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. KANHAIYA LAL [LAWS(ALL)-2013-4-72] [REFERRED TO]
M.R. BHARDWAJ VS. DELHI STATE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD [LAWS(DLH)-2013-7-68] [REFERRED TO]
PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS VS. G.GUNASEKARAN [LAWS(MAD)-2019-2-161] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF BIHAR VS. MADAN BIHARI SINGH [LAWS(PAT)-2009-4-193] [REFERRED TO]
SARDAR SINGH VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2014-11-81] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. PRABHAT KUMAR [LAWS(ALL)-2015-4-26] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS VS. UPINDER SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-2013-8-290] [REFERRED TO]
BRAMHANAND M. DESSAI VS. STATE OF GOA AND ORS. [LAWS(BOM)-2015-4-188] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. G D GOEL [LAWS(DLH)-2008-3-15] [REFERRED TO]
NUTAN BHARTI GRAM VIDYAPITH VS. GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2010-6-115] [REFERRED TO]
DEVI SINGH VS. STATE OF U.P [LAWS(ALL)-2023-3-86] [REFERRED TO]
SASHINARO VS. STATE OF NAGALAND [LAWS(GAU)-2022-8-76] [REFERRED TO]
CHATTER SINGH VS. UOI [LAWS(DLH)-2014-8-183] [REFERRED TO]
TERKESHWAR NATH SRIVASAVA VS. STATE OF UP [LAWS(ALL)-2012-4-78] [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF PERSONNEL OFFICER SOUTHERN RAILWAY VS. PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVT LABOUR COURT [LAWS(MAD)-2009-10-79] [REFERRED TO]
EHC VIRENDER SINGH VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2010-8-569] [REFERRED]
KANWALJEET SINGH VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2008-8-203] [REFERRED]
SHAYAM PRASAD SHARMA VS. RAJASTHAN CO OPERATIVE DAIRY FEDERATION [LAWS(RAJ)-2012-3-46] [REFERRED TO]
SHAYAM PRASAD SHARMA VS. RAJASTHAN CO OPERATIVE DAIRY FEDERATION [LAWS(RAJ)-2012-3-46] [REFERRED TO]
SHAYAM PRASAD SHARMA VS. RAJASTHAN CO OPERATIVE DAIRY FEDERATION [LAWS(RAJ)-2012-3-46] [REFERRED TO]
AJIT SINGH KUNDU VS. STATE OF HARYANA & OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2017-1-364] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Leave granted.
(2.)Union of India and its functionaries call in question correctness of the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissing the writ petition filed by the present appellants and affirming the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (in short the 'CAT'). Background facts in a nutshell are as follows :
Respondent filed the Original Application claiming that he was entitled to pay and allowance from the date on which proforma promotion was given and not from the date of actual promotion. Appellants relied on circular dated 15/17 September, 1964 to contend that the claim was untenable.

(3.)According to CAT the only question which was to be decided was whether the respondent was entitled for his pay and allowance from August, 2001 on which date he was actually promoted as M.C.M. or with effect from 9.9.1997 from which date he has been given promotion on proforma basis. Appellants denied him the arrears with effect from 9.9.1997 on the ground that he has not worked on the promotional post during the said period and as such he was not entitled for the revised pay from that date. Reliance was placed on paragraph 228 of Indian Railway Establishment Manual (in short 'IREM') Volume I dealing with employees who have lost promotion on account of administrative error. It inter alia provides that in such cases the pay should be fixed on proforma basis and the enhanced pay was to be allowed from the date of actual promotion and no arrears on this account was to be paid for the past period as he did not actually perform duties and responsibilities of the higher post. The Tribunal relying on a decision of this Court in Harbans Singh v. State of Punjab and Others 1995 (S3) SCC 471 held that the stand was unsustainable. Tribunal's order was assailed before the High Court.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.