IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. L.P.A. No.1075 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 4.2.2010 Ranbir Singh. -----Appellant Vs. Haryana State Cooperative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd. & another. -----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present:- Mr. S.S. Godara, Advocate for the appellant. ----- ORDER: 1. This appeal has been preferred against judgment of learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition against denial of promotion to the appellant 2. It is not disputed that in the year 2000-01, integrity of the appellant was held to be doubtful and his overall work was assessed to be average. Later on, after holding inquiry, punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect was imposed on the appellant. In the year 2005, one person LPA No.1075 of 2009 junior to the appellant was given promotion and the appellant was denied promotion on account of bad service record. 3. Learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition in view of admitted fact that the service record of the appellant was not above board. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant. 5. Only contention raised by learned counsel for the appellant is that after 10 years, the effect of adverse entry could not be taken into account. Assuming it to be so, period of 10 years was not over in the year 2005, which is the relevant date for consideration to promotion. It has been submitted that the incident in question, which is the basis of adverse entry, is of the year 1992 and period of 10 years should be counted from that day. Reference was made to para 15 of the writ petition wherein it has been averred that the adverse ACR was on account of the incident of the year 1992. In the corresponding para of the reply, this averment has been denied and it has been stated that adverse entry in the ACR for the year 2001-02 was entered taking into account the work and conduct of the appellant for that year. In the ACR in question, it has been recorded that the appellant was not honest, was cunning and was not discipline. The ACR in question was conveyed to the appellant and was never challenged. 6. In these circumstances, no ground is made out to interfere with the view taken by learned Single Judge. 2 LPA No.1075 of 2009 7. The appeal is dismissed. ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ) JUDGE February 04, 2010 ( ALOK SINGH ) ashwani JUDGE 3