SUKHBINDER SINGH UPPAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of para 7 of the instructions dtd. 17/4/2000 (Annexure P-2).

(2.) The petitioners are retired Deputy Superintendent of Police of State of Punjab. At the time of retirement, the petitioners were officiating Superintendent of Police. The date of retirement of petitioner No.1 is 30/6/2008 and date of retirement of petitioner No.2 is 31/10/2005. The petitioners retired after completing 14 years service as DSP. The petitioner No.1 completed 14 years service as DSP on 20/2/2008 and petitioner No.2 completed in April' 2005. The respondent has denied benefit of ACP to petitioners on the ground that benefit as per impugned instructions accrued on first day of subsequent year meaning thereby, the benefit to petitioner No.1 accrued on 1/1/2009 and to petitioner No.2 on 1/1/2006. The petitioners retired in the intervening period i.e. date of completion of 14 years service and date of accrual of the benefit.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a two Judge Bench of Supreme Court in Director (Admn. And HR) KPTCL and others Vs. C.P. Mundinamani and others 2023 SCC OnLine SC 401 has settled the controversy involved in the present case. The Supreme Court has held that benefit accrues on the date of completion of required service. The relevant extracts of the judgment read as: