RSA-2217-2017 (O&M)

-1-

2023:PHHC:071572

RSA-1293-2019 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

239 (02 cases)

CM-5400-C-2017 in/and

RSA-2217-2017 (O&M)

Date of Decision :16.05.2023

Haryana Power Generation Corporation

Limited and others

...Appellants

Versus

Neerja Bhatia

...Respondent

CM-3209-2019

RSA-1293-2019 (O&M)

Haryana Power Generation Corporation

...Appellant

Versus

Promila Mehta and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

Present:

Mr. R.S. Longia, Advocate for the appellant

in RSA-2217-2017.

Mr. Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate for the appellant

in RSA-1293-2019.

Mr. Rajesh Arora, Advocate for the respondent(s).

* * *

Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)

1.

By this common order, above mentioned two regular second

appeals are being disposed of as both the appeals involve same question of

law on similar facts.

AARTI SHARMA

2023.06.06 12:13

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

RSA-2217-2017 (O&M)

-2-

2023:PHHC:071572

RSA-1293-2019 (O&M)

2.

For the purpose of this order, firstly the facts are being taken

from RSA-2217-2017 titled as Haryana Power Generation Corporation

Limited and others vs. Neerja Bhatia.

3.

Respondent-plaintiff was appointed as Junior Scale

Stenographer after she was selected through the Service Selection Board on

12.05.1977. Prior to the said selection on the post of Junior Scale

Stenographer, she was already working as steno-typist on regular basis since

14.11.1975. An employee working on a cadre post on completion of 10

years of service is entitled for the benefit of 1^st ACP and on completion of 20

years of service benefit of 2^nd ACP is to be extended in case employee does

not get promotion to the higher rank despite eligibility.

4.

Respondent-plaintiff was granted the benefit of 1^st and 2^nd ACP

in the cadre of Junior Scale Stenographer keeping in view the fact that

respondent-plaintiff was eligible for promotion but due to the non-

availability of the promotional avenue, she remained working in the feeder

cadre hence, she was extended the said benefit of ACP after rendering 10-20

years of service.

5.

In the year 1998, after getting benefit of 1^st and 2^nd ACP,

respondent-plaintiff was promoted from the post of Junior Scale

Stenographer to that of Senior Scale Stenographer. It is a conceded position

that said promotion was forgone by the respondent-plaintiff in the year 1998.

6.

It may be stated here that as per the rules governing the grant of

benefit of ACP, in case an employee gets promotion but forgoes the same,

the benefit of the ACP already granted is liable to the withdrawn. Though,

the plaintiff, Neerja Bhatia declined the promotion in the year 1998 but

AARTI SHARMA

2023.06.06 12:13

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

RSA-2217-2017 (O&M)

-3-

2023:PHHC:071572

RSA-1293-2019 (O&M)

inadvertently the benefit under the Assured Career Progression Scheme

already granted to her were not withdrawn by the appellant-Corporation.

7.

At the time when the respondent-plaintiff attained the age of

superannuation, while going through her service record, the said fact of non-

withdrawal of the benefit of ACP extended upon completion of 10-20 years

of service on account of forgoing her promotion in the year 1998 was

noticed and the said benefit of 1^st and 2^nd ACP was withdrawn by the

appellant-Corporation and her pay was refixed in the year 2011. Upon

refixation of pay, it came to the notice of the appellant-Corporation that a

sum of Rs.85,873/- was paid in excess to the plaintiff-Neerja Bhatia, which

was ordered to be recovered from her retiral benefits. Recovery of the excess

amount upon refixation of the salary from the retiral benefit was challenged

by plaintiff Neerja Bhatia by filing a civil suit in the year 2012 and keeping

in view