COCP No.2071 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.2071 of 2009 Date of Decision: 30.7.2010 S.K. Ratra .....Petitioner Versus K.K. Jalan and another ….Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA 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: Shri Ranjit Saini, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri Rameshwar Malik, Additional AG, Haryana, for the respondents. Hemant Gupta, J. (Oral) The writ petition filed by the petitioner and others, Sub Diviisonal Engineers, working with the Haryana State Minor Irrigation and Tubewell Corporation, was allowed by the learned Single Judge of this Court on 18.5.1993. It was directed that the petitioners shall be entitled to the revised scale of pay with effect from May, 1989 as has been granted to the employees working in the Corporation by way of deputation or in the Public Works Department of the Government. The LPA against the said judgment was dismissed on 20.8.2001 and so was the SLP on 16.4.2008. COCP No.2071 of 2009 [2] Since the order passed by this Court was not given effect to, the petitioner and some others invoked the contempt jurisdiction of this Court by way of COCP No. 1707 of 2008. The said contempt petition was dismissed vide order dated 23.3.2009 as infructuous after it was observed on the basis of the statement of the respondents that due payments have been made to the petitioners, but it was directed that the petitioners be supplied the details about the payments made. Liberty was granted to the petitioner to submit a representation if the payments are not as per the judgment dated 18.5.1993. The grievance of the petitioner in the present contempt petition is that the respondents have made payments to the petitioner by assuming the date of joining of the petitioner in the year 1980, whereas the petitioner was appointed and joined services as Sub Divisional Officer in the year 1976. The benefits of selection grade has been granted with effect from 18.2.1993 and not with effect from 1.5.1989, the date on which the petitioner completes 12 years of service. The petitioner has been treated as promoted with effect from 18.12.1981, on completion of 10 years of service as Junior Engineer, though he worked as Sub Divisional Officer since 25.11.1976. The said aspect has been explained in the reply filed. It has been pointed out that the petitioner was appointed as Apprentice Sectional Officer during June, 1971 on the basis of Bachelor Degree of Technical Education awarded to him by the University of Rajasthan, Jaipur in April, 1969. Later on, the petitioner was allowed six advance increments on the basis of the said degree and was treated as Graduate Sectional Officer. On the basis of such degree, the petitioner was promoted to the rank of Sub Divisional Officer in the year 1976. COCP No.2071 of 2009 [3] However, during the scrutiny of the service record of the petitioner, it was found that the Bachelor Degree of Technical Education awarded to the petitioner by the University of Rajasthan, Jaipur, was neither recognized by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission nor Haryana Public Service Commission as equivalent to an Engineering Degree. The petitioner was given an opportunity of hearing. During the opportunity of hearing, the petitioner admitted that the degree was not recognized by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission for appointment of an Assistant Engineer or Sub Divisional Officer. The Board of Directors of the Corporation decided that the qualification of technical education possessed by the petitioner can be equated only with Engineering Diploma and that the petitioner should be reverted to the rank of Junior Engineer and the emoluments received by the petitioner during the period 1976 upto the date of reversion, may be recovered from him as he was not entitled to draw salary in the pay scale of the Sub Divisional Officer. A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and thereafter, an inquiry into the matter was got conducted by the then Chief Engineer. The Inquiry Report was placed before the Board of Directors of Corporation on 20.2.1981. The Board of Directors of the Corporation considered the inquiry report and the clarification given by the Principal, Regional College of Education, Ajmer and decided that the petitioner may be treated as an ad-hoc officiating Sub Divisional Officer till he clears Section `B’ of AMIE Examination and becomes a full fledged degree holder. The petitioner never qualified AMIE examination. He was designated as Sub Divisional Officer on completion of 10 years of service as Junior Engineer on 18.12.1981 and reflected in the seniority list of Sub Divisional Officers at serial COCP No.2071 of 2009 [4] No. 13 circulated on 22.5.1995. The petitioner never objected to his placement as Sub Divisional Officer with effect from 18.12.1981 as the date of appointment. The petitioner is not entitled to count the period of service rendered on the post of Sub Divisional Officer for the reason that he was not qualified to hold such post. The fact that the petitioner was not qualified to hold such post, is not disputed. Therefore, it is apparent that the petitioner is claiming benefits for the period, he was not possessed of requisite qualification to hold the post of Sub Divisional Officer. Thus, the present petition, is an abuse of process of Court. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.20,000/-. The amount of costs shall be deposited in the Haryana Legal Services Authority within a period of two months. [HEMANT GUPTA ] JUDGE 30.7.2010 ds