IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Serial No. 203 CWP-14402-2001 Decided on:10.04.2026 Jeet Ram . . . Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Mr. B. K. Bagri, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Aakash Singla, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.

TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J.(ORAL)

The petition has been filed inter alia seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the orders dated 14.05.2001 and 30.08.2001, Annexures P-3 and P-4 respectively, whereby the petitioner has only been considered entitled to notional benefits from the date of promotion, asking him to return the arrears of salary already paid. Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing the respondents to grant pay scale of the promotional post of Headmaster to him from the deemed date of promotion, i.e., 20.02.1985.

2. Succinctly, as apparent on record, the petitioner, who was working as Junior Basic Training (JBT) teacher in the Department, was promoted as Headmaster with effect from 19.04.1991. He filed a petition claiming promotion from a retrospective date. However, during pendency of the petition, the Department on its own passed an order, dated 08.06.2000, giving him retrospective promotion as Headmaster with effect from 20.02.1985. Consequently, re-fixation of pay order was also issued on 23.06.2000, Annexure P-2. Later, vide impugned office order dated 14.05.2001, Annexure P-3, the petitioner was asked to return the amount on the ground that the arrears of salary on the promotional post of Headmaster were wrongly given to him on 12.08.2000 from 01.01.1986 to 19.04.1991. Recovery pursuant to the impugned orders was stayed by this Court vide order dated 17.09.2001.

3. In this factual background, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner was wrongly denied promotion as Headmaster from 20.02.1985 for no fault of his. The mistake was corrected by the Department by passing the order dated 08.06.2000. And therefore, he cannot be denied the benefit of actual salary/ pay scale from that date. In fact, the benefit was partly given to him by releasing the arrears from 01.01.1986 to 19.04.1991, which has been sought to be withdrawn vide impugned letter dated 14.05.2001 without any justification.

4. Learned State counsel is not in a position to dispute that no justification is forthcoming regarding the reason why the petitioner is not entitled to arrears of salary on the promotional post with effect from 20.02.1985. The impugned order dated 14.05.2001 also does not explain either the reasons for giving the arrears in part or for withdrawing the same; nor was any show cause notice issued to the petitioner before passing the order.

5. Heard.

6. It remains undisputed that after granting promotion to the petitioner as Headmaster with effect from 19.04.1991, the Department on its own passed another order dated 08.06.2000 granting him promotion from retrospective date, i.e., 20.02.1985. This was done during pendency of the petition filed by him seeking promotion as Headmaster from the retrospective date. It is also a conceded fact on record that after re-fixation of petitioner’s pay as Headmaster in the light of office order dated 08.06.2000, he was also paid arrears of salary partially from 01.01.1986 to 19.04.1991, though vide impugned order dated 14.05.2000, these have been ordered to be withdrawn directing him to return the amount of arrears. No reasons have been given for passing the impugned order, nor has it been explained as to why the petitioner is not entitled to arrears of salary from the date of promotion as Headmaster, viz, 20.02.1985. It remains settled that once an employee has been denied promotion on account of any wrong by the Department, he becomes entitled to arrears of salary as well. Reference can be made to judgment dated 19.07.1995, rendered by the Division Bench in LPA-544-1992 titled Vidya Parkash Harnal v. State of Haryana. The relevant extract of the