JUDGMENT :

Namit Kumar, J. (Oral)

The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court by filing the present petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 15.07.2024 (Annexure P-6), vide which the claim of the petitioner for stepping up his pension at par with his alleged junior Harcharan Singh, has been rejected. Further a writ of mandamus has been sought for directing the respondents to step up the pension of the petitioner at par with Harcharan Singh by treating the petitioner as deemed to have been promoted as Draftsman w.e.f. the date his junior Harcharan Singh, was promoted.

2. The brief facts as has been pleaded in the present petition are that the petitioner was appointed as Junior Draftsman with the erstwhile Punjab State Electricity Board (now Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL) w.e.f. 07.01.1977 on ad hoc basis and initially his services were regularized on 17.10.1980. Later on, his services were regularized w.e.f. 07.1.1977 in pursuance to the judgment and decree dated 15.05.1991, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Patiala. Thereafter, vide memo dated 15.03.1996, the seniority of the petitioner was refixed at Serial No.844-A in the seniority list of Junior Draftsman. Earlier to this, the petitioner was assigned seniority at Serial No.1240 by treating him as having been appointed from 17.10.1980, however later on, the same was changed from 1240 to 844-A, keeping in view his date of regularization as Junior Draftsman w.e.f. 07.01.1977. One Sh. Harcharan Singh, was appointed as Draftsman on ad hoc basis w.e.f. 15.12.1976 and on regular basis on 01.04.1978 and was assigned seniority at Serial No.986 as Junior Draftsman. He was promoted as Draftsman w.e.f. 07.03.1986 and since the petitioner was assigned seniority at Serial No.844-A in the seniority list of Junior Draftsman, therefore, he was also entitled for promotion as Draftsman w.e.f. 07.03.1986 i.e. the date on which Harcharan Singh was promoted as Draftsman. Although the petitioner was also promoted as Draftsman w.e.f. 22.06.2000, however, he was entitled for deemed date of promotion as Draftsman w.e.f. 07.03.1986. Thereafter, Harcharan Singh was further promoted to the post of Head Draftsman w.e.f. 24.01.2006, however, the petitioner was not assigned the deemed date of promotion as Draftsman w.e.f. 07.03.1986 and when he retired from service, he was drawing basic pay of Rs.24,980/- whereas Sh. Harcharan Singh, who retired on 31.10.2010, was drawing basic pay of Rs.29,420/-. It is further the case of the petitioner that when the petitioner came to know that Harcharan Singh is drawing more pension than the petitioner, he served a justice demand notice dated 06.02.2023 and since no action was taken on the said notice, he filed CWP No.29055 of 2023, before this Court and the same was disposed of vide order dated 22.12.2023, with a direction to respondent No.1 to consider the justice demand notice dated 06.02.2023, within a period of eight weeks. The said claim has been rejected by the respondents, vide order dated 15.07.2024 (Annexure P-6), wherein the service particulars of the petitioner and Sh. Harcharan Singh, have been mentioned and the same reads as under:

The Service Particular of Sh. Jagdev Singh S/o Balwant Singh, now HDM (Retd.)

The Service Particular of Sh. Harcharn Singh S/o Jagir Singh, now HDM (Retd.)

Thereafter, the claim of the petitioner has been rejected, by passing the following order:-

Sh. Harcharan Singh, now HDM (Retd.) is having seniority no.986 against seniority no.1240 of Sh. Jagdev Singh, now HDM (Retd.) in period 01.04.1978 to 30.06.1981. This means Sh. Harcharan Singh, now HDM (Retd.) is senior to Sh. Jagdev Singh. But Jagdev Singh claimed regularization of Adhoc Period (07.01.1977 to 16.10.1980) as per Civil appeal no.163 dated 15.05.1991 which resulted in reaffixing the seniority at Sr. no.844-A as per Under Secretary/Zones (O/o Director/Pe