JUDGMENT : 

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.

1. Instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari seeking quashing of the letter dated 27.10.2017 (Annexure P-20) issued by respondent No.6 and letter dated 19.12.2017 (Annexure P-21) issued by respondent No.3, vide which claim of the petitioner for fixing his pension @ Rs.26,640/- per month was rejected and further to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to fix pension of the petitioner @ Rs.26,640/- per month, instead of Rs.24,240/- per month.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner was appointed as a Telephonist under the respondents on 05.09.1977 and was later merged into the clerical cadre vide order dated 21.01.1982. Subsequently, the petitioner applied through open selection and was duly appointed as a Sub-Station Attendant (SSA) against an advertisement issued by the Board, with the appointment order dated 29.04.1986. Owing to administrative delays not attributable to the petitioner, he was ultimately placed at the disposal of Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB) and joined as SSA on 06.05.1989. Thereafter, on the basis of an unblemished service record, the petitioner was promoted as Junior Engineer (Sub-Station) on an ad hoc basis by BBMB w.e.f. 10.12.1991, which promotion was later regularized by the respondent-Board vide order dated 19.05.2006 (Annexure P-6). The petitioner served continuously in that capacity until his retirement on 31.07.2011, drawing a final basic pay of Rs.26,640/- per month. Learned counsel further submits that the core grievance of the petitioner pertains to denial of time-bound promotional scales under the Board’s policy circulated vide office order dated 23.04.1990, which grants such scales after completion of 09 and 16 years of regular service in a cadre w.e.f. 01.01.1986. The respondents’ own clarification dated 15.09.2003 (Annexure P-10) expressly stipulates that if an existing employee is directly appointed to a higher post through open selection, the service for time-bound promotion shall be counted from the date of joining such higher post. It is further argued that the petitioner’s induction into the cadre of SSA was through a direct open selection process, therefore, as per the Board’s own policy, his service for the grant of time-bound promotional scales ought to be counted from 06.05.1989 i.e the date, on which he joined as SSA.

3. Further, the petitioner, along with others, had challenged the promotion of his juniors by filing CWP-14536-1991, which was allowed by this Court vide judgment dated 03.07.2014. In compliance with the said judgment, the petitioner was granted deemed date of promotion as SSA w.e.f. 12.03.1981 and as Junior Engineer (Sub-Station) w.e.f. 11.10.2002. However, while purporting to implement the judgment, the respondents have acted in a manner contrary to its spirit and intent. Instead of granting the consequential benefits of seniority and time-bound promotional scales from the deemed dates, the respondents have illegally and unilaterally changed the petitioner’s induction post from SSA to Telephonist without any show-cause notice or opportunity of hearing. This retrograde alteration, effected after the petitioner’s retirement, has resulted in the wrongful reduction of his pensionable pay from Rs. 26,640/- to Rs. 24,240/- per month and has deprived him of the promotional benefits, that rightfully accrued to him upon implementation of the Court’s directions.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that impugned action of the respondents is arbitrary, discriminatory, violative of the principles of natural justice and in direct contravention of the Board’s own service regulations as well as the specific directions issued by this Court in CWP-14536- 1991. Moreover, this Court in CWP-14536-1991 never issued any direction to change the induction post of the petitioner