R.S.A.No.1930 of 2011(O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh R.S.A.No.1930 of 2011(O&M) Date of decision: 3.5.2011 Senior Executive Engineer and others ......Appellants Versus Bikramjit Singh .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Rajiv Malhotra, Advocate, for the appellants. **** SABINA, J. Plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration claiming increment/proficiency step up on completion of 23 years of service w.e.f. 1.1.1996. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, was that he was appointed as Apprentice Sub Station Attendant with the defendant board on 1.9.1969. Services of the plaintiff were regularised on 1.9.1970 as Sub Station Attendant. The plaintiff was promoted as Junior Engineer-II-S/S on 1.6.1985. The plaintiff retired from service on 30.4.2006 on completion of 50 years of age. The plaintiff was R.S.A.No.1930 of 2011(O&M) 2 entitled for increment/ proficiency step up w.e.f. 1.1.1996 on completion of 23 years of service in terms of circular No.20/ 2000 and office order No.392/ FIN/PRC-121 dated 28.7.2000 passed by the defendant-board. Defendants, in their written statement, averred that the plaintiff was not entitled for increment/ proficiency step up as he had not cleared the departmental examination. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by the trial Court:- “1. Whether plaintiff is entitled to declaration as prayed for? OPP. 2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for mandatory injunction as prayed for? OPP 3. Whether the suit is not maintainable ? OPD 4. Relief.” The Civil Judge (Jr.Divn.) decreed the suit of the plaintiff vide judgment and decree dated 15.4.2009. The said judgment and decree were upheld in appeal filed by the defendants vide judgment and decree dated 3.1.2011 passed by the Additional District Judge (Adhoc), Fast Track Court. Hence, the present appeal by the defendants. After hearing learned counsel for the appellants, I am of the opinion that the present appeal is devoid of any merit and deserves dismissal. Admittedly, the plaintiff had joined the service of the defendant-board on 1.9.1969. The plaintiff retired from service on 30.4.2006. The plaintiff had received all his retiral benefits. The R.S.A.No.1930 of 2011(O&M) 3 plaintiff did not earn third promotion and he had received the salary in the pay scale of SS-II and not as SS-1. The imposition of condition of passing of the departmental test could have been imposed on an employee who was granted promotion to the higher post. However, the plaintiff was not granted any promotion to the higher post and was, thus, entitled to claim increment/ proficiency step up on his completing 23 years of service. The defendants had failed to bring on record any rule which prescribed that for grant of proficiency step up on completion of 23 years of service, the employee was required to pass the departmental test. No substantial question of law arises in this regular second appeal, which would warrant interference by this Court. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE May 03, 2011 anita