STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. PRITAM SINGH SAHOTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 16.3.1993 of the Executing Court. Shri Pritam Singh Sahota filed a suit for declaration and mandatory injunction. The suit was decreed to the effect that the order dated 1.6.1982 bearing Memo No. 3892/43/13 RE 115/82/2845 (received by the plaintiff on 20.6.1982) vide which the representation of the plaintiff for condonation of break in his service from 23.4.1958 to 15.4.1963 was rejected is illegal, mala fide, arbitrary, without jurisdiction against the principles of natural justice, discriminatory and against facts and law and is against the procedure, precedent, rules and is, therefore, inoperative, null and void and the plaintiff is legally entitled to the condonation of break in his service and is also entitled to emoluments and other benefits admissible to him from time to time with consequential relief for mandatory injunction directing the defendant-State to condone the break in service of the plaintiff and treat that period for all benefits including full pay and allowances etc.

(2.) Plaintiff was paid the arrears in terms of the decree that had attained finality. However, according to the plaintiff, he become entitled to promotion as Assistant with effect from 10.3.1974 and, therefore, he was entitled to promotion and payment of arrears from that date till the date of his retirement that is 30.6.1981. This benefit was not granted to the employee so consequently he took out execution. The Executing Court vide order dated 3.9.1982 came to the conclusion that the decree holder cannot be denied the benefit of promotion to the post of Assistant due to him simply because he has not worked on the promotional post. It consequently held that the decree holder is entitled to the promotion as Assistant with all consequential benefits.

(3.) It is this order of the Executing Court which is under challenge in this revision petition.