LPA No.1287 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No.1287 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: November 20, 2009 State of Haryana and others ...Appellant Versus Shankar Lal ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. Rameshwar Malik, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, for the appellants. ORDER 1. The State is aggrieved by the order of learned Single Judge directing counting of period of service rendered by the respondent with the Municipal Committee, for the purpose of fixation of pay and grant of 1st ACP scale under the provisions of Haryana Civil Services Assured Career Progression Rules, 1998. 2. The respondent joined service in 1984 with the Municipality, Palwal, as Chowkidar-cum-Mali. From that post he was promoted to the post of Clerk on 20.12.1989. On 30.12.1999, employees of municipality were transferred to the service of the State. The respondent claimed ACP scale on the ground that from 1989 to 1999 he had completed 10 years of service but he had not been given any financial upgradation. This entitled him to ACP scale. LPA No.1287 of 2009 2 3. The claim was contested on the ground that under conditions of absorption in the State service, past service was not liable to be counted. 4. Learned Single Judge overruled the objection relying upon judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 15.7.2008 in Civil Appeal No. 4446 of 2008 (arising out of SLP (C ) No. 14099 of 2006) (State of Haryana and another Versus Deepak Sood and others) and judgment of this Court dated 27.11.2008 in CWP 15715 of 2008 (Ashok Kumar Versus State of Haryana and others). 5. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record. 6. From the judgments, which have been relied upon by learned Single Judge, it is clear that past service with the municipality was liable to be counted for the purpose of ACP scale, notwithstanding conditions of absorption. That being so, the respondent having completed 10 years from 1989 to 1999 and having not been given any upgradation was eligible for consideration for ACP scale. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the year 1989 the respondent had been given promotion which has not been taken into account. 8. We do not find any merit in this contention, as opposition by the State to the claim for ACP was on account of conditions of absorption, which was not accepted by learned Single Judge, following judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court. Moreover, promotion of the respondent was prior to 1999 and thereafter for 10 years no upgradation was given, in absence of which claim of the respondent was covered by the judgments, referred to above. LPA No.1287 of 2009 3 9. In view of the above, we do not find any ground to interfere with the view taken by the learned Single Judge. 10. The appeal is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE November 20, 2009 (GURDEV SINGH ) prem JUDGE