- (1.) The petitioner-Karnail Singh by way of the present writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India prays for setting aside the impugned office order dated 3.5.2002 (Annexure-P.1) vide which monetary benefits on the promoted post from the deemed date of promotion i.e. 30.8.1995 have been denied but have been granted w.e.f. 9.3.2000 i.e. the date when he actually started working on the promoted post.
(2.) The petitioner was appointed as a Lower Division Clerk (LDC) in the Punjab State Electricity Board ('Board' for short) (respondent No. 1) on regular basis on 10.1.1962. He was promoted as Upper Division Clerk (UDC) on 21.11.1978 vide order of the Chief Engineer (Hydel) of the Board, which he joined on 23.5.1980. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted as Assistant Revenue Accountant w.e.f. 6.8.1987 and he joined on 12.10.1987. However, he was given deemed date of promotion w.e.f. 20.6.1986. It is alleged by the petitioner that his seniority was wrongly fixed w.e.f. 12.10.1987. Consequently, his next promotion, though it had become due, could not be given because of the wrong fixation of seniority. As a result of this, persons junior to the petitioner were promoted as Internal Auditors vide office order dated 21.7.1995 issued by the Chief Auditor (respondent No. 2) of the Board. The petitioner, as he was not considered for promotion, made a representation dated 14.5.1997 to consider him for promotion as Internal Auditor. After making the representation, the petitioner was promoted as Internal Auditor vide office order dated 12.12.1999. He joined the said post of Internal Auditor and started working w.e.f. 9.3.2000. It is alleged that had the petitioner been promoted at the right time, that is, when his juniors were promoted on 21.7.1995 he would have got his next promotion as Internal Auditor on time. In any case, it is submitted that the petitioner is not staking any claim for the said promotion as he has retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.6.2000. The petitioner made representations to commute the pension and release the pensionary benefits by taking into account the deemed date of his promotion i.e. 30.8.1995. He also prayed that consequential benefits accruing to him be given. In an earlier writ petition i.e. C.W.P. No. 206 of 2002 filed by the petitioner, this Court had vide order dated 4.1.2002 issued directions for consideration and decision on one of his representations. The petitioner received an office order dated 3.5.2002 (Annexure-P.1) in terms of which he has been granted the deemed date of promotion w.e.f. 30.8.1995 i.e. the date when his juniors were promoted. However, he was held entitled to the benefits of pay fixation only and the arrears on this account, it was held, would be paid to him w.e.f. 9.3.2000 i.e. the date when he actually started working as Internal Auditor. This, it is stated, is in terms of the Punjab Government instructions dated 8.12.1998 which have been adopted by the Board vide memo dated 8.10.2001 and are based on the rule laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Paluru Ramkrishnaiah and others v. Union of India and another, 1990 AIR(SC) 166 The petitioner again approached this Court by way of C.W.P. No. 17895 of 2002 and this Court on 12.11.2002 (Annexure-P.2) directed the consideration of his representation. There being inaction on the part of the respondents, the petitioner filed contempt petition i.e. C.O.C.P. No. 534 of 2003 in this Court which after issuance of notice was disposed of on 4.9.2003 (Annexure-P.3) as the order dated 12.11.2002 (Annexure-P.2), it was stated, had been complied with and necessary payments had already been made. The said statement, it is stated, is not supported by any documentary evidence whereas the petitioner had pointed out the error committed by the respondents in the fixation of his pension. The same is to the effect that he has not been granted the financial benefits from the deemed date of promotion to which he was not promoted due to the negligence of the respondents. The petitioner accordingly prays for setting aside the office order dated 3.5.2002 (Annexure-P.1) to the extent it denies him the financial benefits from the deemed date of promotion i.e. 30.8.1995.
(3.) On notice, written statement has been filed by the Chief Auditor (respondent No. 2) of the Board in which it is stated that the petitioner has not worked as Internal Auditor from 21.7.1995 to 8.3.2000 and he has been given deemed date of promotion from 30.8.1995 vide order dated 3.5.2002. Therefore, on the principle of 'no work no pay', he is not entitled for the monetary benefits for this period. It is further stated that all the retiral benefits available to the petitioner regarding fixing his revised pension on the basis of his deemed date of promotion have been granted. Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.;