C.R.No. 2806 of 2004 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 2806 of 2004 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 05, 2009 Devinder Kumar Sethi ...........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mrs.Justice Sabina Present: Mr.Rohit Ahuja, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.J.S.Sandhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab -- Sabina, J. (oral) This revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is for setting aside the order dated 22.7.2002 (Annexure P10) and order dated 24.12.2003 (Annexure P11) passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sultanpur Lodhi and Additional District judge, Kapurthala, respectively, directing the respondents to grant similar relief to the petitioner, such as arrears of Master's grade, seniority in Master's Cadre, promotion, etc., as has been granted to similar situated teacher-Kesar Singh Dhillion. Petitioner Devinder Kumar Sethi filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he had improved his qualification and had qualified B.A.I examination in July, 1970 and further qualified B.A. Final examination on C.R.No. 2806 of 2004 (O&M) 2 30.6.1977 and was eligible/entitled to all the benefits in terms of letter 5958-FR(2) 575600 dated 23.7.1957 issued by the Finance Department. The suit filed by the petitioner was decreed on 7.12.1989. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the execution petition seeking implementation of the decree dated 7.12.1989. Vide impugned order dated 27.7.2002 (Annexure P10), the execution application was dismissed as having been fully satisfied by the Executing Court. In appeal, the said order was upheld by the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Kapurthala vide order dated 24.12.2003 (Annexure P11). Hence, the present revision petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that Kesar Singh Dhillon, who was similarly situated, had also filed a suit claiming same relief as had been claimed by the petitioner. The suit filed by Kesar Singh Dhillon was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 7.12.1989 that is on the same date, the suit of the plaintiff was decreed. The reliefs granted to the petitioner and Kesar Singh Dhillon were identical. However, in the case of Kesar Singh Dhillon, the Executing Court granted him relief qua refixation of seniority as well as the arrears in Master's grade. The said order of the Executing Court was challenged by the State in this Court and the revision petition filed in this Court was dismissed vide order dated 31.10.1995 with the modification to the effect that the arrears were restricted to 38 months prior to the filing of the suits. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner was also entitled for relief to refixation of his seniority in Master's grade in terms of decree . Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, has submitted that the relief qua seniority had not been granted to the plaintiff C.R.No. 2806 of 2004 (O&M) 3 vide the decree passed in the suit filed by the petitioner and, hence, he was entitled to claim refixation of seniority in the Master's grade. The suit of the plaintiff as decreed reads as under:- “The suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Shri V.K.Gupta, Advocate counsel for the plaintiff and Govt. pleader for the defendants, it is hereby ordered that the suit of the plaintiff succeeds and the same is hereby ordered to be decreed with costs for declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to the grade along with all other benefits in terms of letter No.5958-FR(2) 575600 dated 23.7.1957 on the basis of his improved qualification i.e. passing BA Part I w.e.f. 1.7.1970 by falling in category-B Ground-IInd.” The suit of Kesar Singh Dhillon as decreed is as under:- “The suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Shri V.K.Gupta, Advocate counsel for the plaintiff and G.P. For the defendants, it is hereby ordered that the suit of the plaintiff succeeds and the same is hereby ordered to be decreed with costs for declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to the grade along with all other benefits in terms of letter No.5958- FR(2) 575600 dated 23.7.1957 on the basis of his improved qualification i.e. passing TDC Part I examination w.e.f. 16.6.1971 by falling in category-B Group-IInd.” The Executing Court vide order dated 23.11.1993 in Execution petition filed by Kesar Singh Dhillon qua relief of seniority held as under:- “DH/plaintiff has claimed seniority in between Sr. No.5048-5049 C.R.No. 2806 of 2004 (O&M) 4 shown in the seniority list prepared D.P.I.Chandigarh in letter/Memo No.16/10-87(S)Amla-2(4)Chandigarh dated 16.7.87. No objection has been filed to this claim of the seniority of the plaintiff/DH. Plaintiff/DH has specifically claimed this seniority in the execution application and also in the reply to the objection petition. But no objection has been taken by the objectors/JDs to this effect. So, under the present judgment and decree plaintiff/DH is also entitled to this seniority number on the basis of judgment and decree dated 7.12.89 as he is to be equated and integrated to the post of JST in master cadre. Plaintiff is also entitled to other benefits as claimed and as decreed in the judgment and decree dated 7.12.1989.” The Civil Revision No.1233 of 1994 filed by the State against the order passed by the Executing Court in Kesar Singh Dhillon's case was dismissed vide order dated 31.10.1995 by this Court with the modification that the arrears were confined to 38 months prior to the filing of the suit. The Executing Court has dismissed the claim of the petitioner qua refixation of seniority, inter-alia, on the ground that the petitioner had failed to place on record the decree sheet passed in favour of Kesar Singh Dhillon. However, now the petitioner has placed on record the decree sheet passed in favour of Kesar Singh Dhillon. The decree sheet passed in the case of the petitioner as well as Kesar Singh Dhillon are similar. However Kesar Singh Dhillon has been granted the relief of refixation of his seniority in Master's grade. In these circumstances, it would be just and expedient to remand the case back to the Executing Court to decide the matter afresh keeping in view the decision passed in the case of Kesar Singh Dhillon by C.R.No. 2806 of 2004 (O&M) 5 the Executing Court as upheld by this Court. Accordingly, this revision petition is allowed. The impugned orders (Annexures P10 and P11 ) are set aside and the case is remanded back to the Executing Court to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law. ( Sabina ) Judge October 05, 2009 arya