IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.WP No. 1027 of 2009. [O&M] Date of Decision: 27th July, 2011. Pitanjal Kumar Petitioner through Mr. Amit Sharma, Advocate Versus State of Punjab & Ors. Respondents through Mrs. Charu Tuli, DAG, Punjab. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 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? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL] The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 22.03.2007 [Annexure P-7] re-fixing his pay as Sub Divisional Engineer w.e.f. 01.01.1994 for the reason that he could not qualify the Departmental Examination in accordance with Rule 15[1]and 15 [2] of the Punjab Service of Engineers Class II, PWD [B&R Branch], Rules, 1965. Suffice it to mention that the petitioner joined the Department as a Junior Engineer and he was promoted as Sub Divisional Engineer [Civil] vide order dated 21.02.2003. The petitioner was required to pass the departmental examination in terms of Rule 15[1] and 15[2] of the Punjab Service of Engineers Class II, PWD [B&R Branch] Rules, 1965 [hereinafter referred to as 'the 1965 Rules'] within a period of three years from the date of promotion. The petitioner, however, retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.12.2004. As the petitioner could not qualify the departmental examination before his retirement, that the impugned order was passed after his retirement effecting his pension and other retiral benefits. It was in this back-drop that on 07.04.2010 this Court passed the following order:- “Owing to the fact that the petitioner was promoted in the year 2003 only when he was due to retirement w.e.f. 31.12.2004 on attaining the age of superannuation and, thus, hardly there was any incentive for him to pass the departmental examination nor he got sufficient period to avail the permissible opportunities in any effective manner, it appears that there were sufficient grounds to invoke the power of relaxation by the Competent Authority. Let the matter be reconsidered by the Competent Authority keeping in view the aforesaid facts. List on 5.7.2010”. In deference to the above reproduced order, the respondents have now passed an order dated 09.11.2010 exempting the petitioner from passing the departmental examination. However, a rider has been imposed that the petitioner shall not be entitled to any arrears of pay on the promotional post from the date of promotion till his retirement. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that the condition imposed while granting exemption from passing the departmental examination to the petitioner is wholly unfair and unjust. I say so for the reason that once the petitioner has been exempted from passing the departmental examination, such an exemption shall relate back to the date when he was required to pass the same. In other words, there shall be a deeming fiction as if the petitioner had passed the departmental examination and/or was not required to pass it. This would obviously render the petitioner eligible for promotion as SDE w.e.f. 21.02.2003, i.e., the date when he actually came to occupy the post of SDE. The writ petition is accordingly allowed with a direction to the respondents to release the arrears of pay to the petitioner on the post of SDE [Civil] from the date of his actual promotion till his retirement. The pension of the petitioner shall also be accordingly re- fixed. Let the needful be done within a period of four months from the date a certified copy of this order is received. Disposed of. Dasti. July 27, 2011. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE