HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.17948 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 15.03.2011 **** Gurmail Singh . . . . Petitioner VS. Punjab State Electricity Board & Ors. . . . . Respondents **** 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? **** Present: Mr. VK Shukla, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. JS Sidhu, Advocate for the respondents ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner joined the respondent-Board (Powercom) as a Lower Division Clerk on 20.03.1980. He has been denied the benefit of promotional increments on completion of 23 years of service on the plea that he failed to pass the Departmental Accounts Examination. The petitioner relies upon a policy circular dated 28.04.1998 (Annexure P4) which empowers the Board to grant exemption from passing the Departmental accounts examination in the case of those employees who have completed 50 years of age. The petitioner’s positive case is that he completed 50 years of age on 13.03.2002. He CWP No.17948 of 2009.doc - 2 – seeks a mandamus to waive off the condition of passing Departmental Accounts Examination in his case. (2). The respondents have filed reply/affidavit explaining that the exemption from passing the departmental examination is to be considered and granted by the competent authority on case-to-case basis depending upon several factors like ACRs etc. The respondents have maintained that exemption cannot be claimed as a matter of right. (3). Having heard learned counsel for the parties at some length and on perusal of the documents on record, I am of the considered view that the respondents are right, in principle, to contend that exemption cannot be claimed as a matter of right. It is for the competent authority to consider the same on case-to-case basis as to whether in a given set of circumstances, the employee deserves to be granted exemption or not. But it does not mean that the petitioner can be denied even right of consideration under the Policy. (4). The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner’s claim as well, in the light of the policy circular dated 28.04.1998 (Annexure P4) and in case it is found that he 2 CWP No.17948 of 2009.doc - 3 – deserves exemption, then to grant the same, otherwise a speaking order shall be passed. (5). The needful shall be done within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (6). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 15.03.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge 3