KASHMIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner claims to have been inducted into the service of the respondents as a Punjabi Master on 1.11.1977 on adhoc basis. He thereafter claims to have been regularised in the employment of the respondents with effect from 1.10.1980 by an order dated 17.9.1982. While adjudicating the claim of the petitioner for proficiency step ups after completion of 8 and 18 years of service, the respondents are only taking into consideration the regular service rendered by the petitioner with effect from 1.10.1980. Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner desires that the service rendered by him on adhoc basis with effect from 1.11.1977 to 30.9.1980 be taken into consideration for the grant of proficiency step ups after 8 and 18 years of service. So as to substantiate his claim, the petitioner relies on Banta Singh and others V. THE State of Haryana and others (CWP No.18429 of 1996 decided on 6.2.1997) rendered by this Court, State of Haryana and others V. Ravinder Kumar and others (Civil Appeal Nos.5740-5741 of 1997 decided on 31.10.2000) rendered by the Apex Court, Sardara Singh and others V. State of Haryana and others (CWP No.5550 of 1998 decided on 19.4.2001), Des Raj and others V. State of Punjab and others (CWP No.13876 of 2001 decided on 11.9.2001) and Puran Singh and others V. State of Punjab (CWP No.219 of 2003 decided on 13.11.2003), all rendered by this Court.

(2.) HAVING considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners, we are satisfied that the claim raised by the petitioner cannot be accepted in law. All the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner pertain to taking into consideration work charged service for determining the benefit due to employees on completion of 8 and 18 years of service. In none of the cases under reference adhoc service was taken into consideration for grant of proficiency step up. In terms of the decision rendered by the Apex Court in State of Punjab and others V. Harjinder Kaur and others (Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.5090 of 1998 decided on 20.2.2001) it has been clearly laid down that adhoc service cannot be taken into consideration for determination, either of seniority, or for the purpose of higher scale of pay after 8 and 18 years of service under the proficiency step up scheme. In view of the above, we find no merit in this petition. The same is accordingly dismissed.