KULDIP SINGH,J. - (1.) The petitioner, in the present writ petition, has impugned order dated 8.3.2013 (Annexure-P-17), passed by Registrar, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana (in short 'respondent-University'), vide which he was denied the selection grade in view of the instructions dated 3.3.1980 and 29.10.1984.
(2.) It comes out that this is second round of litigation. The petitioner was working as a Restorer with respondent-University. He joined the service on 11.6.1966 and ultimately retired on 7.10.2004. The petitioner claims that the recommendations of the 2nd Pay Commission were implemented with effect from 1.1.1978 and the recommendations of the 3rd Pay Commission were implemented with effect from 1.1.1986. These were duly adopted by respondent-University. It is claimed that since the recommendations were adopted by respondent-University, therefore, he is entitled to selection grade in view of instructions dated 3.3.1980 (Annexure- P-3), followed by instructions dated 29.10.1984 (Annexure-P-6). It also comes out that previously, the petitioner had approached this Court by way of filing a writ petition i.e. CWP No. 14896 of 1993, titled as Nachhatar Singh v. Vice-Chancellor, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, and others, which was decided by the Single Bench of this Court on 23.3.2011 (Annexure-P-15), in which it was mentioned that the petitioner was granted selection grade of L 510-810 till 31.12.1985. The said writ petition was dismissed by observing that the selection grade was denied to the employee in the pre-revised pay scales due to inaction of the authorities and later on, his case was kept pending to await the report of the 3rd Pay Commission. The petitioner filed the Letters Patent Appeal i.e. LPA No. 293 of 2012 against the judgment passed by the Single Bench of this Court in CWP No. 14896 of 1993, titled as Nachhatar Singh v. Vice- Chancellor, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, and others, which was heard by a Division Bench of this Court and allowed the said LPA, vide order dated 13.3.2013 (Annexure-P-16). The relevant extract from the operative part of the judgment is reproduced as under :- "This appeal is allowed. The orders of learned single Judge is set aside. We would, however, like to place on record the submission of learned counsel for the respondents that selection grade, in any case, was not admissible to the Restorers. He submits that section grade was provided to only six categories of employees out of twenty. However, this is disputed by the learned counsel for the appellant. In any case, it is not for us to go into this aspect in the present appeal because of the reason that the matter was not considered from this angle by the respondents-authorities at all. As mentioned above, the only reason for denying selection grade was that it came to be abolished from 1.1.1986. We, therefore, allow the writ petition filed by the petitioner to the extent that the case of the appellant shall be considered by the respondents for grant of selection grade on its own merits and as per rules. Order to this effect shall be passed within one month from today. In case, the appellant still has any grievance by the order that may be passed, it will be open for the appellant to challenge the same, in accordance with law."
(3.) Accordingly, the respondents considered the case of the petitioner and passed the impugned order dated 8.3.2013 (Annexure-P-17). The operative part of the said order is reproduced as under :- " In the light of the orders of the Hon'ble High Court, the request of Sh. Nachhattar Singh, Ex-Restorer received in this office on 26.2.2013 have been examined and it have been found that as per notification issued by the Comptroller, PAU vide No. CAU.B.I.80/773 dated 11.1.1980, only six categories of employees were provided selection grade out of 20 categories and there was no provision for the grant of selection grade to the post of Restorer/Restorer-cum-Daftri. Therefore, Sh. Nachhattar Singh, Ex-Restorer is not entitled for the grant of any selection grade w.e.f. 1.6.1985, as claimed by him. The request of Sh. Nachhattar Singh, Ex-Restorer received on 26.2.2013 is hereby rejected." ;