SURESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Case taken up through video conferencing.

(2.) Petitioner - Suresh Kumar has filed the instant Civil Writ Petition under Articles 226/227 of Constitution of India against respondents - State of Punjab through Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Forest and Wildlife Preservation, Punjab, The Principal, Chief Conservator of Forests and The Conservator of Forests, North Circle, Punjab craving for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents to grant 1st extension in service w.e.f. 1.2.2020 to the petitioner, who is eligible for the same as per instructions dated 8.10.2012 (Annexure P-l) and had applied within time on the prescribed proforma and his case was duly recommended and certified.

(3.) Inter alia, in the writ petition, the petitioner has contended that he was initially appointed as Clerk in the respondent - Department on 12.8.1983 and was promoted as Senior Assistant in September, 2000 and then as Superintendent in May, 2011 and thereafter as Administrative Officer on 25.9.2017; his date of birth is 20.1.1962; the petitioner was to retire from service after attaining the age of superannuation on 31.1.2020. According to the petitioner, his work and conduct during his service career of 36 M? years has been excellent and outstanding. Further it has been contended that, the Government of Punjab had issued a circular dated 8.10.2012 granting extension in service beyond the date of retirement of the Punjab Government employees of all groups i.e. Group A, Group B, Group C and Group D by one year requiring the employees to give their option, which was to be final and irrevocable; thereafter, the Government decided to grant the 2nd extension in service of 1 year from 59 to 60 years vide circular dated 20.9.2013; as per the instructions issued by the respondents certain categories of persons would not be considered for extension in service and furthermore those employees who are on extension of the 1st year or 2nd year in their service tenure and are covered under the situation mentioned in the instructions dated 30.4.2015, their cases will be reviewed i.e. Persons against whom decision had been taken to issue charge sheet under Rule 8 of the Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules or against whom charge sheet had been issued; persons upon whom major penalty stood imposed which was still effective till the date of superannuation; persons upon whom major penalty had been imposed in the last three years prior to the date of superannuation and persons against whom the competent authority had granted the prosecution sanction in a criminal/vigilance case or where the Court of competent jurisdiction had framed the charges; later on the Finance Department had issued clarification dated 7.5.2018 stating that if any case of corruption is being found against the officials/employees and it is found to be prima facie, even if the preliminary inquiry is pending in that regard, then the extension in service would not be granted in terms of instructions dated 8.10.2012 and 20.9.2013.