HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ****

Reserved on 25.11.2024 Pronounced on 15.01.2025 ****

State of Haryana & Ors. ... Appellants VS.

Devi Lal ... Respondent ****

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL ****

Present: Mr. BS Virk, Sr.DAG Haryana for the appellants Mr. KL Arora, Advocate for the respondent ****

Sandeep Moudgil, J.

(1). Appellants – State of Haryana and others have preferred this Regular Second Appeal to challenge the judgment of the Additional District Judge, Sirsa, dated 11.08.2011, allowing the appeal of the respondent- plaintiff/appellant – Devi Lal thereby reversing the judgment of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Sirsa, dated 31.1.2011 passed in the Civil Suit No.466C of 2007 titled “Devi Lal Vs. State of Haryana & others” seeking declaration and mandatory injunction, dismissing the suit, with a prayer to set aside the judgment of the Appellate Court.

Claim in suit (2). Respondent-plaintiff – Devi Lal filed civil suit before the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) Sirsa (for short ‘trial Court) for declaration and mandatory injunction against the State of Haryana and others, including Secretary to Govt. of Haryana, Education Department, Haryana, to the effect that respondent-plaintiff was appointed as Lecturer in Hindi on Adhoc basis and he joined as such on 29.8.1979 and was not paid salary for the period from 16.3.1980 to 31.7.1980; from 17.3.1981 to 2.8.1981 and from 16.3.1982 to 31.8.1982 on account of summer vacation etc. although was appointed through Haryana Public Service Commission and he joined as such on 31.8.1982 and in this way, he had continuous service at his credit as Lecturer since 29.8.1979. It was also averred that during service, the respondent- plaintiff and one Subhash Kamboj, Lecturer in Sanskrit at that time had instituted a suit against the appellant-defendants which was decreed on 12.5.1989 by the then Sub Judge Ist Class, Sirsa and the appeal (Civil Appeal No.181-CA of 1989/1990 on 4.7.1989) filed by the State against the said judgement was dismissed and the judgment of the court of Sub Judge Ist Class was upheld, vide judgment dated 27.7.1996, and Regular Second Appeal No.1100 of 1992 filed by the State titled “State of Haryana Vs. Devi Lal and others” was also dismissed by this Court. It is further stated that the respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for release of salary of the aforesaid broken period due to summer vacation as detailed above and for release of other benefits, however, the said suit was dismissed by the then Civil Judge (Junior Division) Sirsa, vide judgment and decree dated 27.7.1996 against which an Appeal was filed which was allowed by the District Judge, Sirsa, vide judgment dated 22.12.1998, by relying upon the observation of the Addl. District Judge, Sirsa, to the effect that the respondent-plaintiff would be deemed to have rendered his services for whole of the period.

(3). However, the learned District Judge had held that the department has withheld the other benefits which the respondent was entitled to receive in view of the order dated 2.1.1992 and further held that keeping in view the observation of the then Additional District Judge, Sirsa (Sh.S.R.Bansal), the respondent is entitled to get the relief already granted to him by the said Court. It was also observed that in the execution proceedings filed by the respondent, vide order dated 17.8.2001, the State of Haryana had fixed the seniority of respondent-plaintiff at Sr.No.516-A i.e. below Smt.Anita Sharma, Lecturer in Chemistry and above the name of Sh.S.L.Jain, Lecturer in Physics and the same shall be subject to final outcome of SLP filed by the Department.

(4). It is stated that the respondent-plaintiff latter came to know that SLP No.14242 of 2001 was dismissed on 3.9.2001 by the Supreme Court and thus the order of fixing the seniority dated 17.8.2001 had achieved finality, however, vide order dated 26.6.2006, the appellant-defendant again refixed the seniority of the respondent-plai