IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
NAMIT KUMAR, J.
Karnail Singh – Petitioner
Versus
Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. & Ors. – Respondents
CWP NO.2535 of 2024
Decided On : 06-02-2024
JUDGMENT
Namit Kumar, J.
Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court by filing the present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 29.08.2023 (Annexure P-5) whereby his claim for grant of promotional increment on completion of 23 years of regular service in view of circular dated 23.04.1990 has been rejected. Further a writ of mandamus has been sought to grant the benefit of promotional increment to the petitioner, in view of circulars dated 23.04.1990 (Annexure P-1) and 28.07.2000 (Annexure P-3).
2. Brief facts, as have been emanated from the petition, are that the petitioner joined as Lower Division Clerk (LDC) on 21.04.1970 in the erstwhile Electricity Board (now PSPCL). He was granted second time bound promotional scale on 21.09.1989 after 16 years of regular service. It has been averred that the petitioner was entitled for third promotion increment on 20.09.1996. He retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.08.2006 from the post of Upper Division Clerk (UDC). Petitioner is claiming the promotional increment on completion of 23 years service in terms of circular dated 23.04.1990 (Annexure P-1). It has further been pleaded in the petition that the petitioner along with others had earlier filed CWP No.2346 of 2017 - Darshan Lal and others v. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. and others, in which he was petitioner No.3. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 27.03.2023 along with a bunch of petitions in terms of directions issued in CWP No.27130 of 2019 - Shavinder Singh v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others. The concluding paras of order dated 27.03.2023 read as under: -
"4. Counsel for the parties are ad idem that the present writ petitions can also be disposed off in terms thereof. Resultantly, the present writ petitions are disposed off in the light of directions issued in the case of Shavinder Singh v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others (supra).
5. The petitioners are allowed to raise their grievance before the respondent-Corporation up to 30th of May, 2023. In case any of the petitioner raises his grievance with regard to declining of the claim by the authorities concerned, the Corporation shall reconsider his claim in the light of law laid down by this Court in the case of Nirmala Rani (supra) and shall also adjudge the same after taking into consideration deletion of conditions as effectuated by instructions dated 1st of October, 2018 within a period of 3 months from the receipt of the representation received by the petitioner(s).
6. In case, the petitioners are found to be entitled for their respective benefits, the same shall be released within a period of 8 weeks thereafter.
7. However, in case the authorities find that the claim of the petitioners does not merit acceptance, the same shall be adjudicated by passing a speaking order.
A copy of this order be kept on the files of other connected cases.
March 27, 2023
Sd/-
(Pankaj Jain)
Judge"
3. The case of the petitioner was considered by the respondent-Corporation and has been rejected vide order dated 29.08.2023 impugned herein with the following reasons: -
"Finance Circular No. 20/2000 dated 28.07.2000 for grant of 23 years of promotional benefits had following conditions:
1) He/she has the avenue of three promotions but has not earned three regular promotions in his/her regular service from the date of joining on the induction post/or any other post specifically declared as induction post for granting time bound promotional/devised promotional scale.
2) He/she has not earned third promotion in his/her regular service between 16th and 23rd years of service.
3) He/she has not been placed in a scale which is higher than the scale of his/her next higher post.
4) The increment(s) are in the nature of advance promotional benefits to be absorbed in the next regular promotion.
5) Those who forego promotion shall not b
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited v. Ghanshyam Dass
C. Jacob v. Director of Geology and Mining
Government of West Bengal v. Tarun K. Roy
Harwindra Kumar v. Chief Engineer, Karmik
Jagdish Lal v. State of Haryana
New Delhi Municipal Council v. Pan Singh
Rup Diamonds v. Union of India
State of Orissa v. Arun Kumar Patnaik
State of Orissa v. Pyarimohan Samantaray
AI
Claims for promotional increments must be raised within a reasonable time, particularly before retirement; delay can bar relief.
Claims for additional increments post-retirement are barred by delay and laches, emphasizing the need for timely action by employees.
Delay in filing a writ petition can bar claims for relief, especially in service matters, as established by the principles of delay and laches.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.