BHAGWAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner prays for the issue of a writ of Mandamus directing the State Government to release the arrears of salary and allowances as due to him. A few facts may be noticed.

(2.) The petitioner had initially joined service as Inspector of Co-operative Societies in the erstwhile State of Pepsu. On re-organisation of States in the year 1956, the petitioner was integrated along with the other employees in the service of the State of Punjab. At the time of re-organisation on November 1, 1966, the petitioner was already working as an Assistant Registrar. He was allocated as such to the State of Haryana.

(3.) On April 9, 1975 M/s Hoshiar Singh and Bhagwan Dass Sharma, who was junior to the petitioner as Assistant Registrar, were promoted to the post to Deputy Registrar. The petitioner was over-loked. He represented. Vide order dated August 2, 1977, the State government issued the orders for the petitioner's promotion as Deputy Registrar. He was still aggrieved. He claimed promotion with effect from the date the persons junior to him were promoted. In January 1978 the State Government issue the order, a copy of which has been produced as Annexure P/4 with the writ petition. By this order the petitioner was promoted with retrospective effect from April 15, 1975, when Mr. Hoshiar Singh etc. had joined as Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies. A few days later the State Government also issued order dated January 2, 1978. It was directed that the petitioner may be granted benefit of increments etc. With effect from April 15, 1975, however, "no arrears shall, be payable to him." The petitioner represented against this order. The State Government kept the matter under consideration for a fairly long time. On September 29, 1981, the Government informed the petitioner that his claim has been rejected. He served a notice through his counsel. Having failed to get any reply he approached this Court through the present writ petition. The petitioner alleges that the action of the respondents in denying him arrears of salary in account of retrospective promotion is illegal and arbitrary. He prays that they may be directed to make the necessary payment.