VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Punjab and Haryana High Court 2024 › High Court of Punjab and Haryana

Jarnail Singh v. State of Punjab and Anr

DISMISSED
Court
High Court of Punjab and Haryana
Decided
12 November 2024
Bench
Sureshwar Thakur, Sudeepti Sharma
Case no.
LPA 18/2017

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Reserved on November 05, 2024 Pronounced on: November 12, 2024 Jarnail Singh              ......Appellant vs. State of Punjab and anr.            …..Respondents

CORAM:   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

Present:   Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant.

Mr. Maninder Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab **** SUDEEPTI SHARMA J.

1.     The present Letters Patent Appeal under Clause-X  of the Letters Patent Act, is preferred against the judgment dated 24.05.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in CWP No. 7156-2015.

2.    Brief facts of the case as stated in the Civil Writ Petition are that the appellant/petitioner was initially recruited to the Post of Clerk with the respondent-department  and  was  promoted  as  Sr.  Assistant  on  28.12.1999. Subsequently,  he  was  promoted  to  the  post  of  Supdt.  Grade-II  after completion  of  14  years  of  service,  vide  order  dated  16.04.2013.  The petitioner-appellant was then retired from service after attaining the age of supernnuation,  vide  order  dated  29.07.2013.  The  petitioner/appellant  was aggrieved from the order dated 30.07.2013, vide which he was reverted from the post of Supdt. Grade II to the post of Senior Assistant and he then filed CWP No. 7156-2015 and the same was dismissed, vide impugned judgment dated 24.05.2016.  Hence, the present appeal.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE COUNSELS FOR THE PARTIES

3.    Learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner contends that he was promoted to the post of Supdt. Grade II, vide order dated 16.04.2013 and he stood retired on 31.07.2013. However, the impugned order dated 30.07.2013 was issued after the date of his retirement, therefore, the same is bad in the eyes of law. He prays that the present appeal be allowed.

4.    Learned  counsel  for  the  appellant/petitioner  has  relied  upon judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India passed in a case of State of Punjab vs. Amar Singh Harika, 1966 AIR SC 1313, wherein Hon'ble the Supreme Court has held that mere passing of an order is not effective unless it is published and communicated to the officer/official concerned.

5.    Per contra learned State counsel for the respondents argues on the lines of the judgment dated 24.05.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge and contends that the impugned order dated 30.07.2013 was rightly passed by the respondent-department.

6.    We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole record of the case.

7.    Before proceeding further, it is necessary to reproduce the order dated 16.04.2013 whereby the appellant was promoted and certain conditions were stipulated in the order, which reads as under:- "1. These promotions shall be subject to the probation for one year.

2.  That  promotion  of  the  official  at  Sr.  No.  1  Smt.  Alka  Senior Assistant to the post of Superintendent Grade-II is made on notional basis  from  the  date  (  i.e  from  04.03.2013)  on  which  her  junior

official  Smt.  Sushma  Devi  was  promoted  to  the  post  of Superintendent Grade-II

3. With the promotion of Smt. Alka, Senior Assistant to the post of Superintendent  Grade-2  from back  date  on notional  basis,  in  the previously issued orders of promotion, the promotion of junior most official  Smt.  Krishna  Batra,  as  Superintendent  Grade  II  shall  be applicable against the vacant post of Superintendent Grade-II with effect from 29.3.2013.

4. These promotions shall be subject to the outcome of the Civil Writ Petition  No.  4254/2000  Dwarka  Dass  Abrol  (retired  as Superintendent) and others versus State of Punjab pending in the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court.

5. These promotions can be reconsidered if any change is made in the seniority of the officers or any administrative necessity arises in view of the policy to be framed by the Punjab Government in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 19.10.2006 rendered with regard to the 85th amendment of the Constitution.

6.  These  promotions  shall  be  subject  to  the  decision  on  the departmental  proceedings  pending  against  Shri  Ravinder  Singh, Senior Assistant, Shri Prem Nath Jindal, Senior Assistant and Smt. Savita  Rani,  Senior  Assistant  under  Rule  8  and  5  of  the  Civil Services  (Punishment  &  Appeal)  Rules,  1970  for  giving  major punishment.  Therefore  the  names  of  these  officials  are  kept  in  a 'sealed  cover'  as  per  instructions  issued  by  the  Government  of Punjab,  Department  OF  Personnel  vide  letter  No.  3/27/97-  3PP-1/2087  dated  27.2.1998.  After  the  decision  in  favour  of  these

employees, they will be promoted on notional basis from the date from which their junior official has been promoted and the junior most employee shall be reverted." ANALYSIS OF THE RECORD

8.    A perusal of the record shows that the appellant was promoted to the post of Supdt. Grade-II, vide order dated 16.04.2013 and his promotion was  conditional,  as  referred  to  above,  wherein,  it  has  been  specifically mentioned that promotion shall be subject to the decision on the departmental proceedings pending against Shri Ravinder Singh, Senior Assistant, Shri Prem Nath Jindal, Senior Assistant and Smt. Savita Rani, Senior Assistant under Rule 8 and 5 of the Civil Services (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1970 for giving  major  punishment.  After  the  decision  came  in  favour  of  the  above employees, they were promoted on notional basis from the date from which their  junior  officials  were  promoted  and  the  junior  most  employee  (i.e appellant) was reverted. This order of the promotion of the appellant dated

16.04.2013  was  conditional  and  his  automatic  reversion  after  the  decision came in favour of his seniors, was already informed to him, in the order of his promotion itself i.e 16.04.2013. A perusal of the record further shows that the appellant  is  reverted,  vide  order  dated  28.06.2013,  wherein  para  6  of  the conditions of promotional order dated 16.04.2013 is specifically mentioned. This order is communicated to the appellant on 30.07.2013. The appellant is relying upon his retirement order dated 29.07.2013, communicated to him on

30.07.2013 by stating that he stood retired on 30.07.2013 and his reversion order is also passed on 30.07.2013.

9.    The contention of learned counsel for the appellant is not as per record. Since the record shows that vide order dated 29.07.2013, the appellant -

*as ordered to be retired fro) Go%ern)ent ser%i"e on attaining the age of superannuation *.e.f. 01./2.#/10 >A'@=. 1/.    9eferen"e at this stage "an be )ade to order dated #1./2.#/10 and order dated 0/./2.#/10 >*hi"h *as )odified=. The sa)e reads as under:(

DIRECTORATE OF INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE, PUNJAB DIRECTORATE OFFICE ORDER

Shri Jarnail Singh, Superintendent Grade-2 is hereby retired from Government service on attaining the age of superannuation with effect

31.7.2013 (Α.Ν.) It is also made clear that if any complaint/enquiry comes to the notice of the office/Government against the officer, then action shall be taken against him as per the instructions/Rules.

DATED:CHANDIGARH KARAN A.SINGH,IAS

29.7.2013 Principal Secretary Industries & Commerce Punjab

Endst. No. Admn/1/3/A-2/4203/2452 Dated 30.7.13

A copy of the above is forwarded to the following for information and further necessary action:-

¶1Accountant General, Punjab, Chandigarh.

¶2Joint Controller (F&A).

¶3District Treasury Officer, Punjab, Chandigarh.

¶4Assistant Director (Admn.)

¶5Pension Assistant.

¶6Shri Jarnail Singh, Superintendent Grade-2

¶7Assistant-6 (Account Branch)

Sd/- Assistant Director (Admn.) for Director of Industries & Commerce, Punjab

DIRECTORATE OF INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE.PUNJAB

OFFICE ORDER

Shri Jarnail Singh, was ordered to be retired from Government service as Superintendent Grade-2 with effect 31.7.2013 (A.N.) vide office order issued underEndst No. A.1/3/A-2/4203/2450 dated 30.7.2013.

With the promotion of Smt. Savita Rani, Senior Assistant vide office order issued under Endst.No. Admn1/A-2/Supdt.Grade-2/Promotion/8428-B dated

30.7.2013 as Superintendent Grade-2, Shri Jarnail Singh has been reverted from Superintendent Grade-2 to the post of Senior Assistant. Therefore by modifying the earlier orders, Shri Jarnail Singh is hereby retired from Government Service as Senior Assistant w.e.f. 31.7.2013 (AN) on attaining the age of superannuation. It is also made clear that if any complaint/enquiry comes to the notice of the office/Government against the officer, then action shall be taken against him as per the instructions/Rules.

DATED:CHANDIGARH KARAN A.SINGH,IAS

30.7.2013 Principal Secretary Industries & Commerce Punjab

Endst. No. Admn/1/3/A-2/4203/2454 Dated 30.7.13

A copy of the above is forwarded to the following for information and further necessary action:-

1. Accountant General, Punjab, Chandigarh.

2. Joint Controller (F&A).

3. District Treasury Officer, Punjab, Chandigarh.

4. Assistant Director (Admn.)

5. Pension Assistant.

6. Shri Jarnail Singh, Senior Assistant

7. Assistant-6 (Account Branch)

Sd/- Assistant Director (Admn.) for Director of Industries & Commerce, Punjab"

11.    Therefore,  it  is  very  clear  from  the  record  that  the appellant/petitioner was rightly retired from service w.e.f. 31.07.2013 (A/F) on attaining the age of superannuation as Sr. Assistant.  So far as the judgment relied upon by learned counsel for the appellant is concerned, the same would not be applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case, as the facts of that case are distinguishable from the facts of the present case.

12.    Therefore,  we  do  not  find  any  infirmity  in  the  impugned judgment  dated  24.05.2016  passed  by  the  learned  Single  and  the  same  is upheld.

13.    Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed being devoid of any merit.

14.    All the pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(SURESHWAR THAKUR)       (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE             JUDGE

November 12, 2024 G Arora Whether reportable    : Yes  TRIPTI SAINI

Source: High Court of Punjab and Haryana, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.