Denial of financial benefits upon notional promotion due to procedural lapses violates principles of natural justice; similarly situated employees must be treated equally.

JUDGMENT :

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.

1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to partially quash the order dated 15.01.2019 (Annexure P-10) to the extent that the petitioner has been promoted only on a notional basis as Grade-2 Executive Officer from the date of promotion of his juniors, i.e., 24.12.2011, at the pay scale of Rs.10,300-34,800 + Rs. 4,600 grade pay. The petitioner further prays for quashing the letter dated 05.07.2019 (Annexure P-12), wherein he was informed that no arrears of salary are payable in case of notional promotion. Lastly, the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to promote him as Grade-2 Executive Officer from Grade-3 w.e.f. 24.12.2011 instead of 17.03.2015 with all consequential benefits and to release arrears of salary for 38 months from 24.12.2011 to 17.03.2015 at the applicable pay-scale with interest.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was working as a Superintendent with the Municipal Council before 2006 and was promoted as Executive Officer Grade-3 on 31.10.2006. On 24.12.2011, several Executive Officers in different Nagar Councils of Punjab were promoted to Grade-2 Executive Officer. However, the petitioner along with five others was not considered at that time due to an alleged incomplete service record and their cases were kept reserved for later consideration. The petitioner contends that his record was complete and was available with the competent authority. The petitioner continued to raise the issue and was eventually promoted to the post of Grade-2 Executive Officer on 17.03.2015. Subsequently the petitioner filed various representations seeking retrospective promotion from the date when his juniors were promoted on 24.12.2011, however, the respondents only granted him notional promotion from 24.12.2011, however, the petitioner was denied arrears of salary for the period 24.12.2011 to 17.03.2015 on the ground that no arrears are payable in case of notional promotion. Hence this writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the short controversy involved in the present case is that although the petitioner has been promoted w.e.f. 24.12.2011 from the date when his juniors were promoted to the Grade-2 post, he was only provided notional benefits and the consequential financial benefits have not been paid to him. He argued that such denial of arrears and consequential benefits amounts to gross injustice since the petitioner was performing the duties deserving Grade-2 pay and seniority from the relevant date. He further submits that the petitioner was denied timely promotion without any valid or justifiable reason, despite his service record being complete and available with the Municipal Council, causing him financial and service related benefits. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that promotion on notional basis, without payment of arrears, defeats the object of promotion and violates the fundamental principles of natural justice and service jurisprudence. In support of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of this Court in Darshna Devi vs State of Punjab and others , 2024(5) SLR 731 and submits that when an employee is unjustly denied promotion due to fault of the employer, he must be granted arrears of salary and other benefits from the date of notional promotion. Hence, the petitioner is entitled to be promoted with effect from 24.12.2011 with all consequential benefits including ar