IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.3988 of 1989(O&M) Date of decision:05.09.2011 Balwant Singh, Assistant Administrative Officer, the New India Assurance Company Limited, The Mall, Patiala, (since deceased) through his L.Rs. ...Petitioners versus The New India Assurance Company Limited, through its Chairman-cum- Managing Director, 87, Mahatma Gandhi Marg, P.Box No.969, Bombay- 400023, and others. ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. N.P.Mittal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. V. Ramswaroop, Advocate, for the respondents. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No. 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? No. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? No. ---- K.Kannan, J. (Oral) 1. The writ petition was filed at the time when the petitioner claimed that he was entitled to be treated as promoted from the day when his juniors were promoted, that is, on 14.01.1985 and sought for other benefits. After the filing of the petition, the petitioner has expired and the legal representatives have been added. The petitioner had actually secured promotion post even during his life time, but the case survives for consideration for the monetary benefits that might accrue if the petitioner's claim to promotions were to be reckoned from anterior date. Civil Writ Petition No.3988 of 1989(O&M) - 2 - 2. The contention is that the petitioner qualified for promotion to the Assistant Administrative Officer's post in a competitive exam and was ranked at Serial No.3 while four other persons, namely, Darshan Lal, S.R.Ahire, Prabh Das and Kesar Das, had been ranked beneath him. The result of the ranking had been released on 21.11.1984 but against the petitioner's name, remarks had been that, the result was subject to review. 3. The contention of the petitioner was that there was a CBI enquiry pending at the time when the ranking was done, but the CBI enquiry and the criminal case that had been instituted came to naught when the Criminal Court found that there was no material for laying a charge against the petitioner and consequently, discharged him from the case. As a result of the fact of discharge, the petitioner should have been considered for promotion when such post fell vacant or shall be promoted from the day when his juniors were promoted. The promotion order had been issued to the petitioner on 01.10.1986 to the post as Assistant Administrative Officer but his grievance is that the persons, who had been ranked below him, namely, Darshan Lal, Prabh Das and Kesar Das had been promoted on 14.01.1985. The petitioner made a representation against the denial of promotion to him and the justification for the respondents' action was that a criminal case had been instituted. It is also a matter of fact that he had been subsequently placed under suspension. If there was a criminal investigation against him, at best the petitioner's case must have been only kept in a sealed cover to await the decision of the criminal case and when the promotion was on the basis the requisite qualification coupled with seniority, the petitioner Civil Writ Petition No.3988 of 1989(O&M) - 3 - must have been promoted to the next higher post especially when he has qualified and when the post had fallen vacant. I accede to the claim of the petitioner that neither the pendency of the criminal case nor a suspension could affect the petitioner's chance for consideration so long as the criminal investigation led to discharge and the suspension which was interim in nature itself did not disqualify him when the ground for suspension had been removed. Consequently, the petitioner was entitled to be considered for promotion on the day when Darshal Lal and others were promoted that is on 14.01.1985 to the post of Assistant Administrative Officer and other higher posts as and when they fell vacant and when he had the requisite eligibility of further promotion. 4. The petitioner shall, therefore, be treated as having been promoted on 14.01.1985 and all the consequential benefits, including the monetary benefits attendant on such promotions shall be worked out and paid with interest at 6% to the petitiones, from the respective dates when they fell due. As far as the relief of salary through the suspension period, the counsel for the petitioner states that the same had been paid to him in the year 1990 and, therefore, that relief does not any longer survive for consideration. 5. The writ petition is allowed to the extent of finding the 1st petitioner to be treated as duly promoted on 14.01.1985, the day when his juniors were promoted and for reckoning of such monetary benefits. The petitioners shall be entitled to all other consequential benefits including any higher scales for promotion posts that were due to the deceased 1st petitioner. The calculation shall be made by the respondents Civil Writ Petition No.3988 of 1989(O&M) - 4 - within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order and the amount released to the petitioners with interest as stipulated above. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE 05.09.2011 sanjeev