STATE OF HARYANA Vs. RAJ KUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Raj Kumar Gupta respondent No. 1 herein was appointed as Sectional Officer in Public Works Department (B&R) Punjab, in 1959. On the reorganisation of erstwhile State of Punjab, his services were allocated to the Haryana State w.e.f. November 1, 1966. He was promoted as Sub Divisional Engineer on 30.12.1972. Approval of the Haryana Public Service Commission, Chandigarh, was sought accordingly. The Chief Engineer, PWD B&R, Chandigarh, had issued a letter dated 14.1.1974 to the Accountant General, Haryana, Chandigarh for issuance of the plaintiff's pay slip considering him as regular employee of the department. The plaintiff has been getting salary of the post of Sub Divisional Engineer regularly in the pay scale as sanctioned by the Haryana Government from time to time. Vide order dated 22.6.1989, the State Government declared that Sub Divisional Engineers were entitled to get the scale of Rs. 4,100-5,300/- after completion of 12 years of regular service. The plaintiff having completed the said period of 12 years of regular service before 1.5.1989, was entitled to this revised scale of pay. But for the reasons best known to the State Government, he was not given the said pay scale, although other Sub Divisional Engineers who were promoted in the year 1972-73 were granted that scale. After serving a notice under Section 80 C.P.C. the plaintiff filed a suit for a decree of declaration to the effect mat he was entitled to get his pay fixed in the revised pay scale of Rs. 4,100-5,300/- w.e.f. 1.5.1989. He also claimed a consequential decree for mandatory injunction directing the defendants to pay all the arrears of salary etc. w.e.f. 1.5.1989 till the date of final payment.

(2.) The suit was contested by the defendants. Written statement was filed. It was admitted that the plaintiff joined the service as Sectional Officer in the year 1959 and was promoted as Sub Divisional Engineer in 1972. It was further contended that he was promoted purely on ad hoc basis as a stop-gap arrangement against out of rota/quota in the year 1972 and was made regular only on 6.6.1980 and prior thereto, he was performing the duties as Sub Divisional Engineer on ad hoc basis for six months against the vacancies of deputationists or those meant for the direct recruits. It was further averred that the promotion quota post against which the plaintiff was promoted become available only on 6.6.1980 and as such, the plaintiff enjoyed benefit for more than eight years against non-quota post. He had not completed 12 years of regular service in this manner and was not entitled to revised pay scale of Rs. 4,100-5,300/-. Validity of notice under Section 80 C.P.C. was challenged although its receipt was admitted. Additional pleas with regard to maintainability, valuation of the suit for the purposes of Court fees and jurisdiction, absence of cause of action and the suit being bad on account of non- joinder of necessary parties and being barred by time were taken. After taking the replication on record, the learned trial Court had framed the following issues:-

(3.) After the parties led evidence, the learned trial Court found that the promotion of the plaintiff in the year 1972 was not merely a stop-gap arrangement and his regular service was to be counted from the year 1972. He was entitled to get his pay fixed in the revised pay scale of Rs. 4,100-5,300/- with effect from 1.5.1989. Resultantly, the suit of the plaintiff was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 9.10.1991 passed by the Senior Sub Judge, Jind.