IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.4252 of 1990 (O&M) Date of decision: 29.11.2011 Ranjit Singh and others ...Petitioners versus The State of Punjab, through the Secretary to Government Punjab, Department of Education, Chandigarh, and others. ....Respondents & CWP Nos.2908, 4831,5855,10824, 10825, 10826 of 1990 CWP Nos.250, 336, 337, 1686 of 1991 and CWP No.1957 of 1992 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Ashish Chopra, Advocate, and Ms. Maninder, Advocate, for Mr. R.K. Chopra, Senior Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. S.S.Sahu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. O.P. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, Haryana in CWP Nos.5855 of 1990 and 1686 of 1991. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No. 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? No. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? No. ---- K.Kannan, J. (Oral) 1. The issue involved in all these cases is the reckoning of adhoc service for proficiency step up. This point has been decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana Versus Haryana Veterinary and AHTS Association-2000(8) SCC 4 and Civil Writ Petition No.4252 of 1990 (O&M) - 2 - State of Punjab Versus Ishar Singh-2002(10) SCC 674. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that only regular service will be counted for the purpose of reckoning continuous service for entitlement to proficiency step up. 2. It is stated that in some of the writ petitions, there is also an issue of seniority. The same principle would also apply to deny the claim for seniority by leaving out of reckoning the period of adhoc service. 3. In terms of the judgments referred to above and the law settled through them, the petitioners' cases cannot obtain favourable consideration. All the writ petitions are, consequently, dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE 29.11.2011 sanjeev