In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh R.S.A. No. 1544 of 2009 Date of decision: April 20, 2009 State of Punjab and others .. Appellants Vs. Vijay Kumar and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Surender Kapoor, Addl. A.G. Punjab for the appellants. A.N. Jindal, J The respondent No.1 had mainly five reliefs in the present suit regarding promotion (i) regarding promotion; (ii) proficiency step up; (iii) TA for the period w.e.f. 1.9.1998 to 28.2.1999; (iv) declining two increments to him; and (v) to expunge the remarks in the ACRs. After appreciation of the evidence led by both the parties, lower court granted the relief partly in favour of the respondent No.1 to the extent that the appellant department was directed to consider the case of the respondent No.1 for promotion to the post of Clerk from the post of Class- IV after giving him opportunity for appearance in the typing test and the appellant department has been directed to arrange typing test for respondent No.1 and if he passes through the said test as per departmental requirement, then he was liable to be promoted to the post of Clerk. The trial court had also held the respondent No.1 entitled for the proficiency step up because he had already completed 16 yeas of service on 27.2.1997. The Appellate Court after hearing at length confirmed the judgment and further observed that the appellants have failed to give any justification for debarring the respondent No.1 from the right of his proficiency step up and they also could not advance any valid argument regarding his consideration for the post of Clerk as per departmental rules. Having examined the concurrent findings returned by both the Courts below, I do not stand to differ with the same. The respondent entered into service in the year 1981 and he is justifiably claiming R.S.A. No. 1544 of 2009 -2- *** proficiency step up as he has already completed 16 years of service. No valid reasons have been assigned for depriving him of his right. Similarly, no evidence has been led by the department to show if they held any typing test for clearing the same for further promotion of the respondent. The lethargy of the department could not be shouldered upon the appellant. The order passed by both the courts below that the respondent was not provided any opportunity and he had no knowledge about the said typing test if it was held and he could be given opportunity to clear the test and then he could be considered for promotion are quite valid. Consequently, findings returned by both the courts below stand maintained on all the issues. Dismissed. April 20, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge