VAJINDER PAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who retired from service as Senior Assistant on 28.02.2009, has filed the present petition impugning the order dated 12.11.2012 (Annexure P-8) whereby his claim for grant of ACP scale on the completion of four years of service was rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner joined service with the Department as Clerk on regular basis on 14.11.1972. He was promoted as Junior Assistant and thereafter further promoted as Senior Assistant on 19.12.1996. On account of some family problem as he could not continue on the promoted post, he sought reversion and his request was accepted. He was reverted to the post of Junior Assistant on October 30, 2003. However, on his turn, he was again promoted as Senior Assistant on 20.7.2006 and after attaining the age of superannuation, retired on 28.02.2009. The submission is that the policy issued by the Government on 3.11.2006 termed as Assured Career Progression Scheme grants benefit of next higher scale to a government employee who does not get any promotion after 4, 9 or 14 years of service in a cadre. While relying on a clarification issued by the Government as is reproduced in grounds in para. 16-B of the petition, it is submitted that even if during the interregnum an employee has been promoted to the higher post, the period prior thereto and subsequent thereto is to be counted for grant of ACP scale. In the present case, the petitioner remained on the post of Senior Assistant from 19.12.1996 till 29.10.2003 and from 20.7.2006 to 28.2.2009. The total period is more than 4 years. As per the scheme, the petitioner is entitled to the next higher scale. It is submitted that neither the petitioner could get the next higher scale in terms of the earlier policy awarding the benefit on completion of 8, 16, 24 and 32 years of service, nor in the present policy which provided this benefit on completion of 4, 9 and 14 years of service.

(2.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that the petitioner who was working as Junior Assistant, was promoted to the post of Senior Assistant on 19.12.1996. He was reverted on his request on 29.10.2003 and had been working on the post of Junior Assistant from October 30, 2003 onwards. Considering the policy applicable, at that time, the petitioner had not completed eight years of service as Senior Assistant to avail the benefit of ACP Scheme. Thereafter, the petitioner was again promoted on the post of Senior Assistant on July 20, 2006 and retired as such on 28.02.2009. During this interregnum, again on the promoted post, the petitioner did not complete 4 years of service as Senior Assistant. In terms of the policy, the petitioner is entitled to the next higher scale only in case he does not get any promotion while working on the post for a period of more than four years. As the petitioner retired before completion of 4 years of service as Senior Assistant, he was not entitled to the benefit sought. It was further submitted that the clarification which has been referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not applicable in the case in hand as the same was only in cases where an employee could not get regular promotion on account of any reason which is attributable to the employer. Further the aforesaid clarification was pertaining to the ACP Scheme which was applicable prior to the present Scheme where this benefit was available on completion of 8, 16, 24 and 32 years of service.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book.