MOHINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties. The two substantial prayers, in this writ petition, are for payment of salary for the period from 1.6.2010 to 15.7.2010 (45 days). The claim arises out of the fact that under the policy of the Haryana Government, the petitioner who was a DSP was granted extension in service on account of winning a police medal which entitled the petitioner to extension of service beyond the normal age of retirement on reaching the age of superannuation.

(2.) THE second claim is for the grant of one advance increment as per policy dated 21.10.2004 (P -2) which entitles Government servant of one advance increment on promotion. The petitioner was promoted as DSP albeit in relaxation of experience as provided in the rules. The case of the petitioner is that 16 other police officials have been granted one advance increment on promotion on the same principle that was applied to the case of the petitioner by relaxing the experience. The petitioner claims one advance increment not only on the strength of the circular but also on the principle of parity with similarly situated employees..

(3.) CONSEQUENTLY , this writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 15.7.2010 (P -13) is modified by issuing a writ of Certiorari that it would read not with immediate effect but with retroactive effect from 1.6.2010. A mandamus is issued to the respondents to grant one advance increment to the petitioner as per policy dated 21.10.2004 and the monetary benefits accruing from this order be handed over to him within two months after the receipt of a certified copy of this order. The petition stands allowed in the above terms.