Civil Revision No. 1212 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 1212 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision:- 16.9.2010 Jagdish Singh ......petitioner vs. State of Punjab and others ......respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: - Mr. B.S. Bhalla, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. S. S. Sahu, AAG, Punjab HEMANT GUPTA, J (ORAL) CM No. 23336-CII of 2010 Application is allowed. Copy of the judgment dated 11.12.1987 as Annexure P-1 is permitted to be taken on record. COCP No. 1212 of 2010 The plaintiff-petitioner filed a suit for declaration challenging the seniority list of Patwaris and Kanungoes. The said suit was decreed on 11.12.1987 and the following was the operative part of the judgment: - As per findings on the above issues, the suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants that the plaintiff is entitled to having his seniority fixed on the basis of the confirmation as Patwari w.e.f. 22.10.1984 and as Moharrir Patwari w.e.f. 6.9.1971 and is also entitled to promotion unless there is any problem of his having not passed departmental examinations to make him eligible for the next post and he is Civil Revision No. 1212 of 2010 -2- further entitled to all the benefits arising out of that from time to time is the form of arrears of pay, allowance etc. And the defendants are ordered accordingly. For the circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly and the file is consign to the record room. The judgment debtor filed objections in the execution proceedings pointing out that the earlier execution filed by the petitioner was withdrawn on 16.2.1991. It has been pointed out that in compliance of the decree, the decree holder was confirmed as Patwari w.e.f. 12.10.1954 and that as Moharrir Patwari w.e.f. 6.9.1971. The petitioner was considered for further promotion on 4.11.1988. The petitioner was ordered as deemed to have been promoted as Naib Tehsildar from the date, the petitioner qualified the departmental examination of Kanungo and became eligible for promotion as Naib Tehsildar. The said order was modified on 9.3.1990 so as to grant benefit of promotion from the date his junior was promoted as Naib Tehsildar i.e. 21.11.1978. The petitioner has also been promoted as Tehsildar on 1.2.1988 from the date on which Dharam Singh was promoted as such. Such objections have been considered by the Court and found that decree stands satisfied. Grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner was entitled to be promoted as Naib Tehsildar on 24.12.1965 when his junior was promoted. It has been found by the Executing Court that the petitioner became eligible for promotion only on qualifying the departmental examination. Thereafter, the petitioner has been give promotion from the date his junior was promoted who was similarly situated. Civil Revision No. 1212 of 2010 -3- In view of the said fact, I do not find any patent illegality or material irregularity in the order passed by learned trial Court which may warrant any interference in the revisional jurisdiction of the Court. Consequently, the same is dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE 16.9.2010 preeti