IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 9640 of 1989 DATE OF DECISION: 11.12.2008 Shri Rakesh Misra ….. PETITIONER VERSUS State of Punjab and others ….. RESPONDENTS CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH PRESENT:Mr. J.P.S.Sandhu, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Amar Vivek, Advocate, for the respondents. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL) This petition has been preferred by the petitioner praying for quashing the order dated 11.05.1989 (Annexure P-19) vide which various claims made by the petitioner have been rejected by the respondents-Markfed. Counsel for the petitioner states that he would restrict his claim to the grant of selection grade in this petition and to that extent, he submits that the respondents have on grounds which are not sustainable, rejected the claim of the petitioner. It is his submission that the respondents have CWP No. 9640 of 1989 -2- conceded the submissions as made by the petitioner as regards his claim to the grant of selection grade. In the impugned order itself, it has been stated and conceded that a decision was taken by the Board of Directors, Markfed, in its meeting held on 17.03.1986 accepting the report of Anomaly Committee about the revision of pay scales of the Engineering Wing. The circular dated 30.06.1986 was issued in view of the said decision. As a matter of fact, the Board of Directors, in accordance with the Rule 1.4 of the Markfed Common Cadre Rules under which the service conditions of the petitioner are governed, has revised the pay scale. However, the contention, which has been raised by the respondents, is that while revising the provision of grant of selection grade, the recommendation to have seven years qualifying service for the same was also mentioned therein. The provision for grant of selection grade to the category of Assistant Engineers has been denied to the petitioner only on the ground that it was not earlier provided under the Rules, which needed to be incorporated in accordance with bye-laws as well as the provision of Section 84-A of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act. It has further been stated therein that in accordance with these provisions, the amendment in the Common Cadre Rules is to be carried out only with the approval of the Registrar Co-operative Societies, Punjab. It is on this ground that a stand was taken that it will have to be sent to the Board of Directors for clarification before sending it to the Registrar for appropriate amendment in the Rules. This, the counsel for the petitioner states, is totally contrary to the Rules as a perusal of Annexure P-10, which is the order passed by the Markfed, which again refers to the resolution passed by the Board of CWP No. 9640 of 1989 -3- Directors in their meeting held on 17.03.1986 vide Agenda Item No. 10, after considering the report of the anamoly committee of posts of Markfed, which states that Assistant Enigneers would be granted the pay scale of Rs. 940-1850 with a selection grade of Rs. 1700-2000, 20% of the sanctioned strength. It was further provided in the said decision that the minimum qualifying service would be seven years for the grant of selection grade. It was further provided that it would be applicable from 01.01.1986 onwards. It is on this basis counsel for the petitioner submits that the post of Assistant Engineer was very much all through available and the stand, which has been taken by the respondents while rejecting his claim, cannot thus be sustained. He further refers to Rule 3.1 of the Punjab State Supply and Marketing Co-operative Services (Common Cadre) Rules, 1967, wherein the post has been mentioned as Sub-Divisional Officer and it was also mentioned that the said post has been redesignated as Assistant Engineer. The scale, which has been granted, was also very much mentioned there, which the petitioner was drawing. The factual aspect, as per the submissions made by the petitioner, has not been disputed by the respondents in their written statement. That being so, the claim of the petitioner has been wrongly rejected by the respondents on a reason, which cannot be sustained in view of the specific Rules providing for such post, on which the petitioner was working. In the light of the above, this petition is allowed and the claim with regard to the grant of selection grade on the post of Assistant Engineer by the petitioner is accepted. The petitioner shall be entitled to the grant of selection grade on his completing required seven years qualifying service on CWP No. 9640 of 1989 -4- the said post as per the decision of the respondents-Markfed. The required benefits, which would accrue to the petitioner due to the grant of selection grade will be disbursed to him within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) JUDGE December 11, 2008 pj Whether referred to Reporters..........................Yes/No.