Mehinder Singh Sullar, J. - (1.) THE crux of the facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant writ petition and emanating from the record, is that Petitioner No. 1 Kartar Singh Aulakh was appointed on 30.1.1959, while Petitioner No. 2 Mangat Ram was appointed in the year 1963 as Tubewell Operators by the Superintending Engineer and Managing Director of Punjab State Tubewell Corporation (Respondent Nos. 3 and 4) respectively (for brevity "Respondent -Corporation"). The Petitioners claimed that as there was no promotional avenue, therefore, they were not promoted to any higher posts for the last about 30 years. The Punjab Government in order to deal with the problem of stagnation was stated to have issued instructions dated 3.3.1980 (Annexure P1) and has introduced the provisions of selection grade, which was higher than the time scale, by means of which, such benefit was available to 20% of the posts in the selection grade in the cadre, by virtue of instructions dated 29.10.1984 (Annexure P2). Although they moved representation (Annexure P3) in this regard, but no action was stated to have been taken by the Respondents on it.
(2.) LEVELLING a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events, in all, according to the Petitioners that although they were entitled to selection grade in pursuance of the government instructions (Annexures P1 and P2) and the judgments dated 26.11.1987 and 21.3.1991 of this Court (Annexures P4 and P5), but the same benefit was illegally denied to them despite the fact that they have completed 30 years of continuous service. On the basis of aforesaid allegations, the Petitioners claimed that the Respondents be directed to grant the selection grade to them with effect from 1.1.1978 and to fix their salaries accordingly in the manner indicated hereinabove. The Respondents contested the claim of the Petitioners. The Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filed their joint written statement, while Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 filed their separate written statement, inter -alia pleading certain preliminary objections of, maintainability of the writ petition, cause of action and locus standi of the Petitioners and objection of delay and latches of more than 12 years in this regard.
(3.) THE contesting Respondents claimed that the Petitioners have already been granted the benefits emanating from the recommendations of 3rd Punjab Pay Commission, which has repealed the report of 2nd Pay Commission. In all, the Respondents claimed that since the 3rd Punjab Pay Commission has repealed the report of 2nd Pay Commission and as per the recommendations of 3rd Pay Commission, special increment of proficiency step -up in place of selection grade, after the completion of 8 and 18 years of service was already granted, so, the Petitioners were not entitled to any benefit in view of the instructions (Annexures P1 and P2) in this behalf at this belated stage. It will not be out of place to mention here that the Respondents have stoutly denied all other allegations contained in the writ petition and prayed for its dismissal.;