AMAR LAL MUNJAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition, the petitioner has impugned the order dated 1.3.1985 (Annexure P-1), vide which payment of the arrears of pay of the petitioner has been restricted to a maximum period of 37 months while creating a temporary post of Superintendent Grade-III for him with effect from 3.12.1974 to 20.11.1983. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of a direction to the respondents to pay the arrears of pay to him with effect from 3.12.1974 to 21.11.1980.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that he was working as an Assistant in the office of Commissioner, Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur for a number of years. A temporary post of Superintendent Grade-III was created in the aforesaid office in the year 1974 and the petitioner was allowed to work on that post. However, he was being paid the salary of the post of Assistant on the plea that the appropriate sanction to the said post has not been accorded by the Government. The petitioner worked and performed the duties of Superintendent Grade-III from 3.12.1974 to 20.11.1983. When the petitioner made several representations, the Government of Punjab ultimately accorded sanction for creation of the aforesaid post vide its letter dated 1.3.1985. According to the said letter, the sanction was accorded to the creation of a temporary post of Superintendent Grade-III for the petitioner from 3.12.1974 to 20.11.1983. However, while creating the said sanction, a condition was imposed that the payment of arrears of pay to the petitioner should be restricted to a maximum period of 37 months.

(3.) The grouse of the petitioner is that the aforesaid condition was wrongly imposed and there was no basis for imposing such condition. Actually, the petitioner was promoted from Assistant to Superintendent Grande-III in the year 1974 and the day he was promoted and discharging the duties of the said post, he was entitled for the payment of salary for the post of Superintendent Grade-III. But he was denied the payment of salary of the post of Superintendent Grade-III and was only being paid the salary of the post of Assistant on the plea that the Government has not accorded sanction to the creation of the temporary post of Superintendent Grade-III. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was not at fault if the sanction was not accorded to the newly created post by the Government at appropriate time. Actually, he had worked on the post of Superintendent Grade-III and was entitled for the salary for the period for which he worked on the said post. Once the sanction was accorded by the Government from retrospective effect i.e. from 3.12.1974, there is no reason for denying the benefit of arrears of payment of salary to the petitioner and the respondents have illegally and arbitrarily imposed the aforesaid condition in the order dated 1.3.1985 without any justification and reason. Against the aforesaid condition, the petitioner also made a representation on 1.8.1985 and served a legal notice on 25.8.1986 but when no action was taken on his representation as well as the legal notice, the petitioner filed the instant writ petition on 4.3.1987. It is submitted by the petitioner that he retired from service on 31.7.1986 after attaining the age of superannuation.