OM PARKASH BHARDWAJ Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for issuance of a direction to the respondents to release the annual grade increments due to the petitioner on 1.1.1992, 1.1.1993 and 1.1.1994. Further direction has also been sought that one proficiency step up increment which fell due on 12.2.1994 on completion of 8 years service as Sub Divisional Engineer may also be released to him which has been illegally with-held by the respondents. As a consequence to the release of aforementioned increments, a prayer has been made by the petitioner to step up his pension and retiral benefits. The petitioner has also sought a writ of certiorari for quashing order dated 12.7.1994, vide which the Chief Engineer, PWD (B&R), Punjab - respondent No. 2 has withdrawn his one increment which was earlier sanctioned reducing his basic pay to Rs. 3300/- per month which has also resulted in reduction of his pension and retiral benefits. Another prayer has also been made for quashing order dated 14.10.1994 deducting some amount from the death-cum-retirement gratuity. The petitioner has claimed interest @ 18% on all the amounts from the date the amount fell due till the date of payments.

(2.) Briefly the facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Sectional Officer redesignated as Junior Engineer on 23.2.1957 in the Department of PWD (B&R). On 21.1.1986, the petitioner along with others was promoted to the post of Sub Divisional Engineer on purely temporary basis for a period of 6 months which continued till the date of his retirement. On 7.11.1990, the petitioner was given proficiency step up increments on completion of 8 years and 18 years of service as Junior Engineer raising his basic pay from Rs. 2700/- per month to Rs. 2850/- per month w.e.f. 1.1.1986. He was also given the designation of the Site Engineer in the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3500/-. Accordingly, his pay was fixed on 20.11.1990 by an order passed by the Executive Engineer. The petitioner was further granted sanction fixing his pay as Sub Divisional Engineer in the pay scale of Rs. 2200-4000/- on 3.1.1991. On 14.5.1991, he was further granted one increment w.e.f. 1.1.1991 and his pay was fixed at Rs. 3400/- per month. However, thereafter no annual grade increments were granted to the petitioner which fell due on 1.1.1992, 1.1.1993 and 1.1.1994 nor the petitioner was granted proficiency step up which fell due on 12.2.1994. The increment that was granted on 14.5.1991 w.e.f. 1.1.1991 was also withdrawn on 12.7.1994, vide Annexure P-8. The petitioner retired from service on 30.4.1994. He made numerous representations and served a legal notice but no action appears to have been taken on the representations and the legal notice. Two of such representations/legal notice have been placed on records as Annexures P-11 and P-12, which are dated 8.11.1994 and 21.4.1997 respectively.

(3.) The stand taken by respondents No. 1 and 2 in their joint written statement is that the petitioner is not entitled to the grant of increments after the completion of 3 years service on promotion as Sub Divisional Engineer. The petitioner having been promoted in 1986 continued drawing increments till 1.1.1990. The increment granted on 1.1.1991 was erroneous because it violated rule 15.2 of the Punjab Service of Engineers, Class II PWD (Building & Roads Branch) Rules, 1965 (for brevity 'the Rules'). According to the respondents, there is an obligation on every Sub Divisional Engineer to pass a departmental examination under rule 15(1) and (2) of the Rules for which he has been given a period of 3 years. If an incumbent fails to pass the departmental examination, then he would not be entitled to earn annual grade increments till such time he passes the examination. On passing the examination, the increments are to be released retrospectively. With regard to order dated 12.7.1994 concerning withdrawal of one increment, the respondents have taken the stand that the Accountant General-respondent No. 3, vide its memo. No. Pen-IX/0-1/94-95/3723-24 dated 17.6.1994 had addressed a communication to the Chief Engineer pointing out that his pay has not been regulated in accordance with the rules and therefore fresh orders were required to be issued. A copy of the aforesaid memo was endorsed to the petitioner also. The petitioner failed to submit any representation against the aforementioned letter issued by the Accountant General which led the department to believe that he did not have any thing to say. Therefore, pay of the petitioner was refixed by withdrawing the increment which was released to him on 14.5.1991 w.e.f. 1.1.1991 and a recovery of Rs. 10,915/- was worked out on account of erroneous release of increments. The aforementioned amount was recovered from the death-cum-retirement gratuity. According to the respondents, such a course is permissible by virtue of provision made in Rule 9.16 (2) and (3) of Punjab Civil Service Rules Vol. II (for brevity, 'C.S.R.'). Similar stand has been taken with regard to order dated 14.10.1994, Annexure P-10 in respect of recovery worth Rs. 10,915/-.