A stale claim for service benefits, such as retrospective promotion, that is raised years after superannuation after a period of dormancy, constitutes gross delay and laches; such claims are not amenable to judicial review under writ jurisdiction even if representations were made.

****

NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the orders dated 23.05.2019 & 26.09.2024 (Annexures P-5 & P-9), passed by respondent No.5, whereby the claim of the petitioner for promotion w.e.f. 05.07.1995 as Head Warder and also further promotion as Assistant Superintendent Jails, has been rejected. Further seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion as Head Warder w.e.f. 05.07.1995 instead of 27.10.2004 and Assistant Superintendent Jails w.e.f. 23.12.2014, the date from which the persons junior to the petitioner have been promoted from the post of Warder to Head Warder and later as Assistant Superintendent Jails and to grant him all consequential service/retiral benefits, along with interest @ 18% per annum.

2. Brief facts of the case, as have been pleaded in the petition, are that the petitioner joined the Department of Prisons, Punjab on 15.12.1980 as Warder after selection through Punjab Subordinate Service Selection Board. During his service tenure, an FIR No.121 dated 08.07.1992 under Sections 223 & 224 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 was registered against the petitioner and other jail staff as one under trial, namely Leela Singh and a convict prisoner, namely Lachhman Singh, had absconded. The petitioner remained suspended from 09.07.1992 to 20.01.1993. The Trial Court convicted the petitioner and other involved jail staff in the abovesaid criminal case. In the meantime, persons junior to the petitioner were promoted to the post of Head Warder on 05.07.1995. The petitioner had filed appeal against the judgment of conviction, which was allowed by the Appellate Court and the petitioner was acquitted on 06.07.1999. Subsequently, he was also exonerated in the departmental inquiry and his suspension period was treated as on duty, vide office order dated 28.06.2000 (Annexure P-1). Thereafter, the petitioner submitted many representations to the respondents for promoting him as Head Warder w.e.f. 05.07.1995 i.e. the date when persons junior to him were promoted, but to no avail and finally, he was promoted as Head Warder, vide order dated 27.10.2004 (Annexure P-3) and posted in District Jail, Sangrur. Thereafter, the petitioner approached this Court by filing CWP-2808-2019 titled as ‘Harpal Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another’ seeking issuance of directions to the respondents to promote him as Head Warder w.e.f. the date persons junior to him were promoted. The said petition was disposed of by this Court, vide order dated 01.02.2019 (Annexure P-4), with a direction to the respondents to pass an appropriate speaking order on the claim raised by the petitioner in the representations dated 07.04.2004 and 09.03.2012, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. Pursuant to the said order, the respondent rejected the claim of the petitioner, vide order dated 23.05.2019 (Annexure P-5) by wrongly mentioning that all the ACRs of the petitioner commencing from 1981 till 1994-95 are ‘Average’ or are not in existence. Thereafter, the petitioner again approached this Court by filing CWP-18413-2024 titled as ‘Harpal Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others’ which was disposed of by this Court, vide order dated 06.08.2024 (Annexure P-8), with liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate representation before the respondents raising grievance qua the recording of the Annual Confidential Report of the years 1992 to 1995 and in case after considering the said repres