AMAR NATH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner has impugned the order dated 13.12.2005 by which the competent authority has sanctioned the grant of Proficiency step-up on completion of 24 years of service to the petitioner with effect from 1.1.1998. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner had completed 24 years of service and was entitled to the said benefit of proficiency step up w. e. f. 1.1.1996. In so far as the instant grievance of the petitioner is concerned, perusal of the order dated 21.3.2001(Annexure P-2) reveals that the petitioner was denied the benefit of proficiency step up on completion of 24 years of service w. e. f. 1.1.1996 on account of the fact that his over all service record could not be adjudged as good. This determination was rendered by the authorities on the basis of a communication dated 10.1.2000. The communication dated 10.1.2000 has been placed on the record as Annexure P-5.

(2.) In order to controvert the determination at the hands of the respondent in relying upon policy instructions dated 10.1.2000(Annexure P-5), learned Counsel for the petitioner vehemently contends that the issue in hand pertains to the suitability of the petitioner for being granted proficiency step up w.e.f. 1.1.1996, and that, for the said purpose, reliance could not have be placed on an instruction which was issued subsequent to the relevant date, i.e., 1.1.1996.

(3.) We have considered the aforesaid contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner. It is not possible for us to accept the same in so far as the policy instruction dated 10.1.2000 is concerned. A relevant portion of the aforesaid instruction is being extracted hereunder: