JUDGMENT :

NAMIT KUMAR, J.

1. Instant writ petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the reply/order dated 22.08.2025 (Annexure P-7) issued by respondent No.2 – Deputy Director, Finance Department (T&A), Punjab, Chandigarh, whereby claim of the petitioner for grant of 2, Versus proficiency step up on completion of 18 years of service has been rejected. Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing the respondents to release the benefits of 2nd proficiency step up after completion of 18 years of service to the petitioner and to revise his pension and retiral benefits after considering the benefits of 2nd proficiency step up from due date along with interest @ 18% perannum and all consequential benefits.

2. Brief facts of the case, as have been pleaded in the petition, are that the petitioner passed the SAS examination and joined service as Senior Auditor in the Treasury and Accounts Branch on 01.04.1978. The Punjab Government issued a notification dated 19.06.1990 to grant Proficiency Step Up/ACP on completion of 8 years and 18 years of service. In pursuance thereof, the petitioner exercised his option w.e.f. 01.04.1987 and requested for refixation of his pay along with grant of 1^st proficiency step-up w.e.f. 01.04.1987, which was allowed vide office order dated 09.05.1991 (Annexure P-2). The petitioner was thereafter promoted as Assistant Controller (F&A) in August, 1991 and posted at Punjab Roadways, Muktsar Sahib, however, due to some unavoidable family circumstances, he could not join and consequently foregone the said promotion. He was again promoted as Assistant Controller (F&A), vide order dated 11.12.1996, and posted in the office of the Civil Surgeon, Nawanshahr, followed by another promotion and posting at Punjab Roadways, Jalandhar-II vide order dated 11.06.1997. Subsequently, vide order dated 17.12.1997 (Annexure P-3), the competent authority modified the posting and adjusted the petitioner at Project Kandi Area, Punjab, Chandigarh, where he joined on 23.12.1997. The petitioner retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.12.1999. The grievance of the petitioner is that although he was granted 1^st proficiency step-up on completion of eight years of service, however, on completion of 18 years of service, 2^nd proficiency step-up was not granted to him, despite repeated requests. He has also submitted a detailed representation dated 24.04.2025 (Annexure P-5) seeking release of the 2^nd proficiency step-up by placing reliance upon the judgment in CWP No.25236 of 2014 – Rachhpal Singh and another v. State of Punjab and others, decided on 02.07.2019, however, the respondents-department without considering the same, rejected the claim of the petitioner, vide order dated 22.08.2025 (Annexure P-7). Thereafter, aggrieved by the same the petitioner served a legal notice dated 26.11.2025 (Annexure P-8) upon the respondents-department which has not been considered by them. Hence, the present writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the respondent-department has wrongly denied the legitimate claim of the petitioner of 2^nd proficiency step up after completion of eighteen years of unblemished service. She further submits that other similarly situated employees have been granted this benefit and denying the same to the petitioner amounts to violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. She further submits that non-grant of 2^nd proficiency step up has adversely affected the retiral benefits of the petitioner, which continues to cause financial hardship. In support of the said contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shri M.L. Patil (Dead) through LRs v. State of Goa and another, 2022(3) SCT 113 and Contempt Petition in Civil Appeal No.3933 of 2023 –Union of India and another v. M. Siddaraj, decided on 20.02.20