CWP No.5993 of 2010.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.5993 of 2010 Date of Decision: 05.04.2010 **** Kiran Kumar Sharda . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab and another . . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. S.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate for the petitioner ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner seeks a mandamus to direct the respondents to promote him as Chief Engineer on substantive basis with effect from the due date i.e. 01.03.2008 and grant him all the consequential service benefits including pay-scales and arrears of pay etc. (2). The petitioner joined the Irrigation Department, Government of Punjab as a Sub-Divisional Engineer on 06.11.1973 and was later on promoted as a Executive Engineer on 21.01.1997 and then as Superintending Engineer on 24.06.2004. It appears that due to non- CWP No.5993 of 2010.doc - 2 – finalisation of the seniority of Superintending Engineers, the petitioner was not promoted as Chief Engineer on regular basis though he was given officiating charge as Chief Engineer, Bhakra Dam vide order dated 28.08.2008 (Annexure P4). The petitioner took charge as officiating Chief Engineer on 03.09.2008 and continued to serve as such till he retired on attaining the age of superannuation w.e.f. 30th November, 2008. (3). The petitioner has two-fold grievances. Firstly, he urges that since the promotional post had fallen vacant much before his retirement he, as per the seniority, was entitled to be promoted against the said post. The procedural lapse, if any, on the part of the respondents cannot work to his disadvantage. Secondly, the petitioner was actually asked to perform his duties as Chief Engineer and he did so, therefore also he is entitled to be paid salary/pay-scale as admissible to the post of Chief Engineer. (4). Both the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner, prima facie, merit acceptance, especially when this Court in a catena of decisions has held that if an incumbent is asked to perform the duties of a higher post in his own pay-scale, CWP No.5993 of 2010.doc - 3 – then he is entitled to be promoted on such higher post and/or paid salary for that higher post. Relying upon these decisions, the petitioner even served a legal notice dated 09.04.2009 (Annexure P7) upon the respondents but no cognizance thereto has been taken so far. (5). In these circumstances, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the Principal Secretary, Government of Punjab, Irrigation Department to take cognizance of the above-mentioned legal notice; consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion as Chief Engineer retrospectively, from the date when the vacancy became available or alternatively consider his claim for payment of the salary as admissible on the post of Chief Engineer for the period he performed the duties of the officiating Chief Engineer. The Principal Secretary shall be obligated to consider the judgements/decisions of this Court and/or the Hon’ble Supreme Court while deciding the above-mentioned claim of the petitioner which shall be disposed of within a period four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (6). Ordered accordingly. CWP No.5993 of 2010.doc - 4 – (7). Dasti . (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 05.04.2010 vishal shonkar