RSA No.3329 of 1999 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.3329 of 1999 Date of Decision:23.04.2009 Amarjit Singh ....appellant Versus State of Punjab & ors. .....respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present: Mr.Amarjeet Singh, appellant in person Mr.Rajesh Garg, Additional Advocate General, Punjab **** RAKESH KUMAR GARG J. This is plaintiff's second appeal challenging the judgment and decrees of the Courts below whereby his suit for declaration to the effect that he was entitled to the benefit of previous service, was dismissed. The plaintiff-appellant was appointed as Sub-Divisional Engineer in the PWD(B & R) Department vide Punjab Government order dated 05.12.1964. He joined the aforesaid department on 01.04.1965. It was averred in the suit that previous to joining of his duties with the respondent-Department, plaintiff was working as Lecturer in Civil Engineering in Government Polytechnic Guru Teg Bahadurgarh near Moga w.e.f. 11.09.1964 and he was relieved from the Post of Lecturer on 31.03.1965. Since his pay, nature of duties etc.remained the same, he was entitled to the grant of benefit of previous service as per the Punjab Government scheme. The aforesaid suit was contested by the defendant- respondents denying the claim of the appellant. It was submitted in the written statement that the nature of the duties of Lecturer and Sub- RSA No.3329 of 1999 2 Divisional Engineer were identical. Even the pay scale of both the posts was different. It was also denied that there were any instructions to allow benefit of previous service with different pay scale/duties to any employee. The trial Court vide impugned judgment and decree dated 26.07.1996 on appreciation of evidence held that the plaintiff-appellant was not entitled to the benefit of previous service rendered by him as there was no lien on the earlier post which was only a temporary one. The suit was also held to be time barred. Consequently, the suit of the plaintiff-appellant was dismissed. Aggrieved therefrom, plaintiff filed an appeal. While dismissing the appeal the Lower Appellate Court affirmed the findings of the trial Court. Still not satisfied, the plaintiff has filed the instant appeal challenging the judgment and decrees of the Courts below. I have heard the appellant who is appearing in person and counsel for the respondents. The Courts below on appreciation of evidence have recorded a concurrent finding of fact that plaintiff-appellant has not brought any evidence to prove as to who other employees were given the benefit of past service and that before joining the post the appellant had resigned from his earlier job and no lien on the earlier post which was only a temporary one was kept. The appellant was unable to show any rule/instructions of the Government on the basis of which he was entitled to the benefit of his past service. Thus, I find no merit in this appeal. No substantial question of law is shown to have arisen in the present appeal. Dismissed. (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) JUDGE 23.04.2009 neenu