SATINDER PAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court praying for quashing of the order dated 21.10.2008 (Annexure P-18) passed by the Director Technical Education and Industrial Training Department, Punjab-respondent No. 2 vide which his claim to count the earlier service rendered by him under the Punjab State Warehousing Corporation (for short "PSWC") for the period 17.2.1984 to 12.8.1985 and from 19.8.1985 to 22.10.1993 in the Punjab State Electricity Board (for short "PSEB") now Punjab State Power Corporation Limited towards pensionary benefits stands rejected. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the petitioner joined the PSWC as a Punjabi Steno on 17.2.1984 and continued as such till 12.8.1985. He applied through proper channel in the PSEB for appointment to the post of a Punjabi Steno. On being selected, he submitted his resignation on 17.8.1985 which was accepted by the Competent Authority vide order dated 25.11.1985. He joined the PSEB on 19.8.1985.

(2.) An advertisement was issued by the Department of Technical Education and Industrial Training, Punjab. In pursuance thereto, petitioner applied through proper channel and his application for appointment to the post of Punjabi Stenography Instructor was duly forwarded vide No. 121241 dated 19.9.1992 to the Director Technical Education and Industrial Training, Punjab. On his selection and issuance of appointment letter, petitioner submitted resignation from the PSEB w.e.f. 22.10.1993 which was accepted by the competent authority and the petitioner joined the post of Punjabi Stenography Instructor on 23.10.1993 in the Department of Technical Education and Industrial Training.

(3.) The Government of Punjab issued instructions dated 14.7.1995 (Annexure P-4) for counting the entire service of a Government employee towards pensionary benefits which would include the service rendered in the autonomous bodies. In pursuance to these instructions, petitioner deposited an amount of Rs. 20,338/- on 17.3.1997, which he had received as retiral benefits from the PSEB on his resignation from there. Petitioner continued to serve the Department of Technical Education and Industrial Training and submitted a representation to the Department claiming counting of the service which he had rendered with the PSWC as also the PSEB. Increments and time bound promotional scale under the assured career progression scheme were also claimed by the petitioner but when no decision thereon was taken, he filed CWP No. 10012 of 2003. The case came up for hearing on 7.7.2003 and was disposed of by this Court with a direction to consider and decide the representation submitted by the petitioner by passing a speaking order. The representation of the petitioner was considered by the respondents and interdepartmental communication thereafter took place and the service book of the petitioner was completed. A final decision was, however, taken by the respondents rejecting his claim for counting of the service rendered by him in the PSWC and the PSEB by passing an order dated 21.10.2008 (Annexure P-18). It is this order which is under challenge in the present writ petition.