1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 16087 of 2008 Decided on: 23rd September, 2011. Bhagan Devi .....Petitioner Versus H.P. State Electricity Board .....Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. ______________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. Vinod Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents : Ms. Anjula Khajuria, Advocate. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition has been filed mainly with the following prayer: “I. That the respondent-board may be directed to grant the benefit of 9/16 years of service as on 2.5.1993 and 2.5.2000 respectively in favour of the husband of the applicant. 11. That the respondents may be directed to calculate and grant the arrears to the applicant along with interest @ 18% per annum the date the same fell due till its realization.” 2 2. In the reply at paragraph 6 sub para-VI (A to E), it is stated as follows: “In reply to these Sub-paras, it is stated with utmost respect that Respondent Board has granted Ist Time Bound Promotional Scale to husband of the applicant namely Er. P.C. Rana Sr. Executive Engineer (deceased officer) w.e.f. 1.2.02 instead of 2.2.01 vide order dated 2.4.05 Annexure RA-V as he has been charge sheeted and imposed a penalty of with holding of 2 increments with cumulative effect vide order dated 29.12.99 (Annexure- RA-III) and the currency period of penalty remained effective from 1.2.2000 to 31.1.02 (2 years) and was operative upto 31.1.02. He became eligible for granting the benefit of Ist Time Bound Promotional Scale w.e.f. 1.2.02 which has been granted to him vide order dated 2.4.05 (Annexure-RA- V) so far as granting him the benefit of 2nd Time Bound Promotional scale w.e.f. 2.5.2000 is concerned, it is stated that the penalty period of withholding of two increments with cumulative effect was operative upto 31.1.2002, as such, he has been granted Ist Time Bound Promotional Scale w.e.f. 1.2.02 and 2nd Time Bound Promotional Scale was admissible to him w.e.f. 1.2.05 i.e. after completion of 3 years service w.e.f. 1.2.02, but the officer had since expired on 14.1.2005 and he was also due for retirement on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.1.2005, therefore, the same could not be granted. As stated in preliminary 3 submissions the facts and circumstances, are re- asserted. The Class-I D.P.C. Meeting held on 28.5.02 has decided to allow Ist. Time Bound Promotional Scale to Er. P.C. Rana (husband) of the applicant w.e.f. 2.2.2001 which has already been allowed to him vide order dated 18.6.02 (Annexure-A-1) and 2nd Time Bound Promotional scale of Rs. 15800-21100 w.e.f. 2.2.2004 after completion of 3 years w.e.f. 2.2.2001, which has been allowed to him vide order dated 13.12.07 Annexure-(RA-VI) and the same has been withdrawn vide order dated 1.1.08 (Annexure-RA-VII) as stated in preliminary submissions.” 2. There is no rejoinder. In case the petitioner has still any dispute with regard to the position as stated in the reply- affidavit, it will be open to her to approach the respondent, in which case the respondent will look into the matter with notice to the petitioner and appropriate action, in accordance with law, in the matter will be taken within another four months. 3. With these observations, the writ petition is dispose of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 23rd September, 2011. (Justice V.K. Ahuja), (hl) Judge.