RSA 127/2023 Page 1 of 15

$~

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

RSA 127/2023, CM APPLs. 35803/2023 & 35804/2023

INDRAPRASTHA POWER GENERATION COMPANY LIMITED

(IPGCL)

..... Appellant

Through:

Mr. S. Wasim A. Qadri, Sr. Adv. with

Mr. Saeed Qadri and Mr. Tarique

Farooqui, Advs.

versus

SHRI RAGHUBIR SINGH

..... Respondent

Through:

Mr. N. K. Jha, Advocate alongwith

Respondent in person

%

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

J U D G M E N T

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J:

1.

This second appeal has been filed under Section 100 read with Order

XLI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’) impugning the final

judgment dated 31.10.2022 passed by the Addl. Sr. Civil Judge, Central

District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (‘First Appellate Court’) in RCA

1334/2016, titled as IPGCL v. Raghubir Singh, whereby the First Appellate

Court has dismissed the appeal and upheld the judgment dated 11.08.2016

passed by Civil Judge-1, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (‘Trial

Court’) in CS No. 596050/2016 titled as Raghubir Singh v. IPGCL.

Signed By:MAHIMA

SHARMA

Signing Date:25.01.2024

18:15:04

Signature Not Verified

RSA 127/2023 Page 2 of 15

1.1.For the sake of convenience, the parties are being referred to as per

their rank and status before the Trial Court. The Appellant is being referred to

as the defendant and the Respondent is being referred to as plaintiff.

1.2.The plaintiff filed a suit (CS No.:164/2011) for declaration and

mandatory injunction. The plaint was inter-alia seeking a declaration to the

effect that plaintiff is senior to Sh. V.K. Chaudhary (the now deleted

defendant no.2) for the post of Assistant Accountant, Section Officer

(Accounts) and Assistant Manager (Finance). The relief of mandatory

injunction sought was to the effect that defendant be directed to consider

plaintiff as appointed/promoted for the post of Assistant Accountant, Section

Officer (Accounts) and Assistant Manager (Finance) prior to the date of the

appointment of Sh. V.K. Chaudhary and to grant all the service benefits to the

plaintiff of the above said posts from an anterior date.

1.3.The Trial Court vide the judgment dated 11.08.2016 decreed the suit

filed by the plaintiff. The Trial Court held that the plaintiff is entitled to the

declaration that he was senior to Sh. V.K. Chaudhary. The Court further

directed the defendant to convene a review Departmental Promotion

Committee (‘DPC’) and the plaintiff be given appropriate seniority. Lastly,

the Trial Court directed that plaintiff is entitled to enhanced pensionary

benefits in accordance with recommendations of the review DPC. The said

findings of the Trial Court have been upheld by the First Appellate Court by

its impugned order dated 31.10.2022.

Brief Facts

1.4.The plaintiff was appointed as permanent junior clerk on 22.01.1974

vide employment no. 15951. Whilst, Sh. V.K. Chaudhary was appointed as a

senior clerk on 13.05.1989 on regular basis.

Signed By:MAHIMA

SHARMA

Signing Date:25.01.2024

18:15:04

Signature Not Verified

RSA 127/2023 Page 3 of 15

1.5.In 1988, there were 171 posts of the Assistant Accountant which were

required to be filled up according to the Recruitment and Promotion

Regulations of 1978 (‘RPR 1978’). In 1988 Sh. U.B. Singh filed a civil suit

no. 523/1988 seeking permanent injunction against defendant from filing up

of vacancy in contravention to the RPR 1978. The said suit was disposed of

on 19.05.1989 with the direction to defendant to fill up 171 posts of Assistant

Accountants within six (6) months in accordance with RPR 1978. The

departmental competitive examination for the said 171 vacant posts of

Assistant Accountant was held on 26.12.1993, but on 15.02.1994 result of

only