SURAJ MAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Suraj Mal was employed as Head Clerk in the office of respondent No. 3 when he was prematurely retired from service with three months' notice, vide order dated 25th May, 1981, Annexure P-1 to the petition, under rule 3.26 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume I, Part-I, (hereinafter called the 'Rules'). The order Annexure P-1 has been impugned before me in this writ petition. It has been stated in the petition that the record of the petitioner was very good and in Nov., 1980, the petitioner was granted the selection grade with effect from 1st April, 1979 on the basis of the good annual confidential reports for the last 10 years. It has also been stated that the petitioner was given the regular scale of Head Clerk w.e.f. 1st April, 1980, and, as such, the premature retirement of the petitioner could not be sustained.

(2.) In reply to the petition, it has been stated that from the years 1969 - 70 to 1979-80, the petitioner earned as many as eight reports which were average, one below average and two good. It has also been stated that the petitioner earned seven reports after the year 1973-74 and out of these seven reports, four reports were average and one report for the year 1974-75 was below average. It was also stated that the selection grade given to the petitioner with effect from 1.4.1979 was on the basis of his seniority and not on a consideration of his merit and as such, could not form the basis of judging the work of the petitioner. It has also been stated that the new pay scales, which were made universally applicable, were given to the petitioner on the post of Head Clerk in the year 1980, as a result of the revision of pay scales. Rule 3.26(d) of the Rules, in so far as it is relevant to the case in hand, is reproduced below:

(3.) The additional point raised by the petitioner is that his premature retirement was bad on the ground that he had received the selection grade and had also been promoted, does not lie in the fact of the case as it has been clearly stated that the selection grade was given to him only on the basis of seniority and the higher grade of clerk was not in the nature of a promotion, hut was given on account of the revision of pay scales.