Regular Second Appeal No.2161 of 2007 (O & M ) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: February 23, 2011. Regular Second Appeal No.2161 of 2007 (O & M ) Dr. Avtar Singh ….Appellant Versus State of Punjab and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr.Gulshan Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.Vivek Chauhan, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, for respondents Nos. 1 to 3 and 5. Mr. Tushan Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.5. -.- MOHINDER PAL, J. Plaintiff Dr. Avtar Singh is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgments and decrees passed by both the Courts below whereby his suit for declaration has been dismissed. Regular Second Appeal No.2161 of 2007 (O & M ) I have heard Mr.Gulshan Sharma, Advocate, appearing for the appellant, Mr.Vivek Chauhan, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, appearing for respondents Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 and Mr. Tushan Sharma, Advocate, appearing for respondent No.5 and have gone through the impugned judgments. The case of the plaintiff-appellant, in a nutshell, is that he was appointed as a Bio-Chemist and joined as such in the Government Medical College, Amritsar on 30.3.1997. The plaintiff- appellant retired from service with effect from 4.9.1997 on request. Prior to joining Government Medical College, Amritsar, the plaintiff had rendered service in the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh (for short `P.G.I’), as Senior Lab Technician from 17.9.1964 upto 29.3.1977. As service of the plaintiff- appellant rendered by him in the P.G.I, Chandigarh, was not counted towards pensionary benefits, he had filed the instant suit for declaration, which has been dismissed by both the Courts below. Undisputedly, the plaintiff-appellant served from 17.9.1964 upto 29.3.1977 in the P.G.I, Chandigarh. It is not the case of the plaintiff that he had joined the Government Medical College, Amritsar, through proper channel. The letter (Exhibit D.1), whereby the plaintiff was offered appointment in the Government Medical College, Amritsar, was addressed to him at his personal address, as had been admitted by the plaintiff while deposing in Court as P.W.1. As per letter of appointment (Exhibit D.1), the plaintiff was offered appointment on temporary basis as Bio-Chemist and it was not mentioned in this letter that previous service of the plaintiff would be counted towards pension or any other service benefits. The plaintiff had drawn initial pay Regular Second Appeal No.2161 of 2007 (O & M ) after his appointment in the Government Medical College, Amritsar, ignoring the benefit of his past service in the P.G.I, Chandigarh. The plaintiff had thereafter submitted representations for protection of his pay which he was drawing in the P.G.I, Chandigarh. However, this request of the plaintiff was declined vide order dated 31.3.1978 (Exhibit D.2) passed by the competent authority. The plaintiff did not challenge the order Exhibit D.2 and it attained finality. In fact, as the plaintiff was offered new appointment vide letter Exhibit D.1, therefore, the question of giving him benefit of his past service did not arise. The plaintiff had been given appointment as Bio-Chemist in Government Medical College, Amritsar, after having been selected by the Punjab Public Service Commission and he had not applied for the said post through proper channel i.e through the Director, P.G.I, Chandigarh. Learned counsel for the appellant referred to a D.B decision of this Court in the case of Manohar Lal Kakkar Vs. State of Punjab and others, 1998 (1) Recent Services Judgments 300 and the case of Prof. Dr.R.R.Sharma (Retd.) Vs. Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh and others, 2000 (1) Recent Services Judgments 69, a decision rendered by a learned Single Judge of this Court. In both these cases, the petitioners therein were granted benefit of their service in the previous departments. However, in Manohar Lal Kakkar’s case (supra), the petitioner therein, who was a B.T. Master in the State of Haryana and had later on applied for service under the Government of India and was selected as such, had submitted his application seeking appointment under the Government of India after getting `No Objection Certificate’ from the competent authority. Similar was the position in Prof. Regular Second Appeal No.2161 of 2007 (O & M ) Dr.R.R.Sharma,s case (supra) where the petitioner had joined the later department after having applied through proper channel. In the instant case, however, as noticed above, the plaintiff-appellant had not applied through proper channel. Therefore, the case law referred by the learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant is of no help to the plaintiff. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not see any merit in this appeal. The same is hereby dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Dated: February 23, 2011. (MOHINDER PAL) ak JUDGE