CWP No.13108 of 2007 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CASE NO.: CWP No.13108 of 2007 DATE OF DECISION: May 5, 2008 PARMINDER PAL SINGH ...PETITIONER VERSUS P.S.E.B. & OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. PRESENT: MR. V.K. SANDHIR, ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER. MR. A.P.S. MANN, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESOPONDENTS. ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(ORAL) The petitioner has prayed that directions be issued to the respondents to grant him the benefits from the deemed date of promotion. The petitioner was initially appointed in the Punjab State Electricity Board as Test Mechanic on 17.12.1985. He was promoted as Engineer (J.E. Testing) vide order dated 31.10.2001. Thereafter, the petitioner vide order dated 2.5.2006 (Annexure P-1) was granted deemed date of due promotion from 29.9.1995, which was the date when his junior Bhagwan Dass was promoted as J.E. (Testing). The respondents have released the benefits due to the petitioner w.e.f. 31.10.01 and not from 29.9.1995. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been promoted w.e.f. 29.9.1995, i.e. the date when his junior was promoted, therefore, he is entitled to be given all the consequential benefits from the date of his notional promotion and not from the date when the orders were CWP No.13108 of 2007 -2- passed. In this regard counsel for the respondents submits that in the Policy Letter dated 8.10.2001, it was specifically mentioned as under:- “It may be noted that where only notional promotion is given, creation of a supernumerary post is required and the promotion is to be ordered on the specific condition that this will only entail refixation of pay so that present/salary of the official is not less than the official immediately below him and question of payment of arrears of pay etc. would not arise. The rule laid down by the Supreme Court in Palnnu Ramakrihsnaiah and others V/s Union of India and another, AIR 1990 SC (167) is reproduced below:- It is settled service rule that there has to be no pay for no work i.e. a person will not be entitled to any pay and allowance during the period he did not perform the duties of higher post although after due consideration he was given proper place in the gradation list having deemed to be promoted to the higher post w.e.f. The date his junior was promoted. So the petitioners are not entitled to claim any financial benefit retrospectively at the most they would be entitled to refixation of their present salary on the basis of the notional seniority granted to them in different grades so that their present salary is not less than those who are immediately below them.” CWP No.13108 of 2007 -3- Learned counsel for the respondents submits that as the petitioner was promoted w.e.f. 31.10.2001, hence he is not entitled to be given any benefits prior to this date. After hearing the counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the petitioner would be entitled to notional benefits in terms of the Policy dated 8.10.2001, only. As the petitioner has not challenged the Policy dated 8.10.2001, therefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioner in this writ petition. The petitioner, if so advised, may impugn the Policy dated 8.10.2001. Writ petition disposed of. (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE May 5, 2008 (KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA) Gulati JUDGE