IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP(T) No.: 6056 of 2008 Date of decision: 14.9.2010 Devinder Singh Sen …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P & Anr. ….. Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting? No. For the Petitioner: Ms. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. _____________________________________________________ Deepak Gupta, J(Oral). 1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed that the respondents be directed to give him all consequential benefits pursuant to his promotion order dated 27.8.1997 Annexure A-2. 2. It would be pertinent to mention that certain original applications were filed in the Erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal wherein promotions to the post of Executive Engineer were challenged. These petitions were disposed of on 6.6.1997 and the relevant operative portion of the order reads as follows: “We thus direct respondent No.1 to convene a meeting of the review Departmental Promotion Committee for consideration of all eligible officer(s) for promotion to the post of Executive Engineers on 2 year wise basis vis-à-vis the vacancies in each particular year(s) during the period commencing from 1985 to 1993 separately in accordance with instructions/rules pertaining to quota and quota basis of each category in the light of observation made above. We further hold that officers so promoted shall be entitled to all consequential benefits arising therefrom. We further direct that the process of selection to the post of Executive Engineer by convening the Review Departmental Promotion Committee be completed expeditiously but not later than three months from the date of this order.” 3. Pursuant to this direction, review DPC was held and the petitioner was promoted as Executive Engineer vide order dated 27th August, 1997 w.e.f. 31st December, 1996. He has, however, been given only notional promotion and the financial benefits have not been given to him. The case of the petitioner is that he is entitled for all consequential benefits including financial benefits. 4. The stand of the State is of two fold. The first ground is that Shri Devinder Singh Sen, the present petitioner was not a party to the proceedings in which it was directed that a review DPC be held. The second contention is that since the petitioner had not actually worked as Executive Engineer he cannot be granted financial benefits. 5. As far as the first contention is concerned, a bare reading of the operative portion of the order passed in OA No. 3 2394/96 and other connected matters which has been quoted hereinabove, clearly shows that the Tribunal had given a direction that all Officers promoted as a result of the said review DPC would be entitled to all consequential benefits arising therefrom. 6. As far as the second contention is concerned, the same is without force. It is not as if the petitioner herein was denied the benefit of promotion for any fault of his. He was not promoted though as per the review DPC now held he was entitled to be promoted. Since there is no fault of the petitioner he is entitled to financial benefits especially when the Tribunal had clearly directed that the promoted Officers would be entitled to all consequential benefits which obviously would include financial benefits. This order of the Tribunal has indisputably attained finality and was not challenged by the State and in these collateral proceedings the State cannot challenge the direction given earlier. 7. In view of above discussion, the petition is allowed and the respondent State is directed to grant all consequential benefits including financial benefits to the petitioner pursuant to the order of promotion dated 27th August, 1997. The respondents are directed to calculate the financial benefits payable to the petitioner and pay the same to him alongwith interest @ 6% per annum on or before 31st March, 2011. In case the amount is not paid to the petitioner on or before the said date he shall be entitled to interest @ 12% per annum. 4 The petition is disposed of. However, it is made clear that the benefit of this order shall not be available to any person(s) who has not approached the Tribunal or have not filed any writ petition till date. (Deepak Gupta), J September, 14 2010 (VT)