P.D. NAGPAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER had been working as Accounts Officer in the office of the General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Panipat. By order dated 18.10.1996 passed by Financial Commissioner and Secretary to Government, Haryana, Finance Department, he and some others were promoted as Senior Accounts Officers in the pay scale of Rs. 2200-4000 "with effect from the date, they take over as such". On promotion he was posted as Senior Accounts Officer in the office of Chief Administrator, Haryana Urban Development Authority, Panchkula. This order reached the office of the General Manager on 13.11.1996 but the petitioner by then had retired from service on 31.10.1996 on attaining the age of superannuation. Petitioner states that he came to know to this order on 13.11.1996 when he went to the office of the General Manager to pursue the settlement of his retrial benefits, he represented to the department that he be treated as having retired from the promotional post of Senior Accounts Officer and his retrial benefits be computed accordingly. When his claim was not acceded to, he filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for a mandamus directing the respondent to treat the petitioner as having retired as Senior Accounts Officer for the purpose of computing his retrial benefits. When this petition came up for motion hearing on 8.5.1997, the learned Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Hawa Singh Deswal v. State of Haryana, 1995(2) RSJ 486, in support of his contention. Learned Judges constituting the Motion Bench did not agree with the view expressed in Hawa Singh Deswal's case (supra) and directed that the matter be heard by a Full Bench. This is how the case is before us.

(2.) IN the reply filed on behalf of the State of Haryana, it is admitted that the petitioner was promoted as Senior Accounts Officer on 23.10.1996 and that the order was dispatched to the petitioner and the General Manager on 24.10.1996. It is, however, averred that if the order did not reach the office in time, it was no fault of the department and that since the petitioner had not take charge of the promotional post till his retirement, he is not entitled to retiral benefits of the promotional post. Reliance is also placed on Rule 3.19(1) of the Punjab Civil Service Rules, Volume 1, Part 1, according to which, a Government employee commences or ceases to be entitled to the pay and allowances of a post with effect from the date he assumes or relinquishes charge of the duties of the post, if he assumes or relinquishes charge of those duties in the fore-noon of that date, otherwise from the following day. It is pleaded that since the petitioner was working as an Accounts Officer on the date of his retirement, he is entitled to the retiral benefits of the post only and he cannot claim benefits attached to a post of which he never took charge.

(3.) IN the case before us, the petitioner was promoted as Senior Accounts Officer with effect from the date he was to take over as such. Thus, his appointment according to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Dr. Amarjit Singh's case (supra), was to become effective with effect from the date when he was to assume charge of the promoted post. Since he did not assume charge of that post he was never appointed to the promotional post and the order of promotion qua him did not become effective or operative and he must, therefore, be held to have retired as an Accounts Officer and consequently he is entitled to the retiral benefits attached to the post from which he retired. He cannot claim benefits attached to the promotional post.