GOBIND SINGH Vs. PUNJAB STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only claim made by the plaintiff-appellant in the suit filed by him is that he is entitled to pay and allowances and other benefits attached to the post of Chick Sexer from the date he was made to work against hat post. It is the common case of the parties that the plaintiff, who was working as a Poultry, was made to work against the higher post of Chick Sexer and by an order, dated 10.11.1983 (Exhibit P-1) he was posted against that post on temporary basis and was transferred from Patiala to Gurdaspur. He was continuing on that post at the time of the filing of the present suit. He worked even thereafter but I am informed that he was then reverted to his original post of Poultry Assistant as he was not eligible to hold the higher post. He was not paid the salary and other allowances of the higher post and his claim in the suit for that pay and allowances was decreed by the trial Court. In appeal, the lower Appellate Court reversed the decree of the trial Court solely on the ground that the plaintiff was never promoted to the post of Chick Sexer and was, therefore, not entitled to pay and allowances of that post merely because he had worked on that post for some time.

(2.) I have heard counsel for the parties at length. It is not in dispute that the plaintiff worked on the higher post temporarily for some time. He is, therefore, entitled to the pay and allowances of that post for that period. He cannot be denied the pay and allowances merely in because the order of his appointment the word 'promotion' had not been used and that he had been subsequently reverted being ineligible. Since he had worked on the higher post, he must get the pay and allowances of that post.

(3.) Consequently, the appeal is allowed, the judgment and decree of the lower Appellate Court set aside and that of the trial Court restored.