CR No.5157 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.5157 of 2009 Date of decision:10.5.2011 State of Punjab and others ...Petitioners Versus Prem Kumar ...Respondent Coram: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.CS Brar, DAG, Punjab with Ms.Kavita Arora, AAG, Punjab for the petitioners. Mr.SK Sharma, Advocate for the respondent Ram Chand Gupta, J.(Oral) The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the impugned order dated 23.4.2009 (Annexure P-1) passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sangrur in execution petition filed by respondent-Decree-holder for execution of the judgment and decree dated 18.8.2003 passed in his favour by learned trial court. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned trial Court. The only point argued by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the judgment and decree passed by learned trial court is not in accordance with instructions of the Government dated 1.12.1988 (Annexure P-4) and that hence, the impugned order passed by learned executing court CR No.5157 of 2009 2 cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. On the other hand, it has been contended by learned counsel for the respondent that judgment and decree dated 18.8.2003 passed by learned trial court has become final, as no appeal against the said judgment and decree was filed by the petitioners-defendants and that the impugned order passed by learned executing court is in accordance with judgment and decree passed by learned trial court in favour of the respondent-plaintiff. He has further contended that respondent-plaintiff has also received the benefits as per the said judgment and decree. It has also been contended that the judgment and decree is also in accordance with the instructions of the Government (Annexure P-4). Hence, it is contended that there is no merit in the present revision petition. Admitted facts are that judgment and decree dated 18.8.2003 passed by learned trial court in favour of the respondent-plaintiff has become final, as no appeal against the said judgment and decree was filed by the petitioners-defendants. Operative part of the said judgment and decree reads as under:- “.... It is ordered that suit of plaintiff for declaration and mandatory injunction is decreed with costs and plaintiff is entitled to grant of proficiency step up and Senior Scale of Rs. 2200-3900 w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and also entitled to first ACP increment from 5.4.1990 and second ACP increment from 5.4.1998 alongwith 9% p.a. Interest from 5.1.1993 on arrears of second proficiency step up and higher scale of Rs. 2200-3900 and on first ACP increment and on second ACP increment from the date when the same falls due.” Respondent-plaintiff filed execution petition, in which final order was passed by learned executing court on 23.4.2009, which reads as CR No.5157 of 2009 3 under:- “Heard. As per office order No.181 dated 19.9.2007 produced by State, the salary of DH at the first instance has been fixed at Rs.1880/- in the old pay scale by giving him two proficiency step up of Rs.40/- w.e.f. 1.1.1986. The new pay scale as per 4th Pay Commission, report was implemented and the pay of DH was to be fixed in the pay scale of Rs.2200-50-2400. The said pay has been reflected in the office order No.181 dated 19.9.2007 as aforesaid, but after giving the DH proficiency step up in the pay scale of Rs.1800-40-2000. The procedure adopted by State Government in granting the proficiency step up as per instruction No.P.G. 7/1/88/5PP(I)(2269)/18527 dated 1.12.1988 is wrong. At para No.2 of the Chapter-4, Rule 4.8 of Volume No.1, Part 1, it has been replaced as under:- The proficiency step ups shall be admissible from the appointed day i.e. only after fixation of pay of the employee concerned in the new revised pay scale under the Punjab Civil Service ( Revised Pay) Rules, 1988. Thus, in view of the said revised Rules, the Government was required to fix the revised pay scale of Rs.2200-50- 2400 at the first instance. It was then only proficiency step ups have to be allowed to the DH and then the State was required to calculate the arrears for the pensionary benefits. Action of the Government in passing the order No.181 dated 19.9.2007 therefore is illegal and office order No.181 dated 19.9.2007 therefore is set aside. The State is directed to fix pay afresh to grant revised pay scale of Rs.2200-50-2400 at the first instance to the DH and then to grant him two proficiency step ups and to submit revised pay scale accordingly, now on or before 15.6.2009. With these observations, application under reference is disposed of.” CR No.5157 of 2009 4 Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to show to this Court that impugned order passed by learned executing court is not in accordance with the judgment and decree passed by learned trial court. Rather the judgment and decree passed by learned trial court has become final and the same has also been implemented. Hence, there is no merit in this petition and the same is hereby dismissed. 10.5.2011 (Ram Chand Gupta) gsv Judge