Regular Second Appeal No. 3100 of 2011 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Regular Second Appeal No. 3100 of 2011 Date of Decision: 28.7.2011 Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and Others …Appellants Versus Gobing Singh …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. Mohnish Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Narender Hooda, Advocate for the appellants. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) The present regular second appeal has been filed by the defendants to the suit. Briefly stated, Gobind Singh, respondent/plaintiff, had instituted a suit seeking declaration to the effect that he is entitled to the benefits of Ist and IInd Assured Career Progression Scales as per the instructions issued by the Government of Haryana from time to time and he is also entitled to 18% per annum as interest on the arrears to be paid. It was further pleaded by the plaintiff that he joined the appellant/defendant No.1 department on 31.10.1968 as a Peon and submitted his joining report at Hisar. Thereafter, he was promoted as a Bill Distributor and at the time of filing of the suit, he was posted in the office of Sub Divisional Officer (Operations), Sub Division Nillokheri, Regular Second Appeal No. 3100 of 2011 2 District Karnal and was receiving a monthly pay of ` 3,050. It was further pleaded that since no adverse remarks have ever been conveyed to him, therefore, the benefit of Assured Career Progression Ist and IInd Higher Standard Scale, which is a time bound scale, could not have been denied to him to which he was entitled after the completion of 10/20 years of regular service as no promotional avenue was available to him. It was specifically pleaded that the respondent/plaintiff has completed 21 years of his regular service on the post of Bill Distributor. Upon notice of the suit, the defendants appeared and filed written statement. The appellants/defendants have admitted that the plaintiff had joined the appellant/defendant No.1 department on 31.10.1968 as a Peon and he was promoted as a Bill Distributor on 1.1.1988. A preliminary objection was raised that since the appellant completed 10 years of his service on 31.10.1978 and 20 years of service on 31.10.1988, at that time, Assured Career Progression Scales were not in force. Therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled to the relief as prayed for. After the completion of pleadings, the trial Court had formulated the issues and thereafter the parties to the suit led their evidence. The trial Court, vide its judgment dated 30.3.2010, held that the respondent/plaintiff had remained on the post of Bill Distributor from the year 1988 to 2008 without any promotion. The Government of Haryana had introduced Assured Career Progression Scheme for granting benefit of Ist and IInd higher standard pay scale to its employees, to whom no promotional avenues were available. The trial Regular Second Appeal No. 3100 of 2011 3 Court further held that as per policy of the Government, the plaintiff was entitled to the Ist Assured Career Progression Grade. The trial Court, having granted the relief, also directed the appellants to pay interest on the amount of arrears at the rate of 6% per annum. The findings, returned by the trial Court, were also affirmed by the lower Appellate Court, vide its judgment dated 24.1.2011. Mr. Mohnish Sharma, Advocate, appearing for Mr. Narender Hooda, Advocate, learned counsel for the appellants, has submitted that since the respondent/plaintiff had not completed the requisite period, which entitled him to the grant of benefit of Assured Career Progression Scale, before introduction of the Scheme, therefore, he is not entitled to the relief granted by both the Courts below. However, during the course of arguments, on the observation made by this Court that an employee, who has completed the requisite service before introduction of the Assured Career Progression Scheme, how he could be held disentitled to the benefit as envisaged under the said Scheme, which was introduced only to provide solace to those employees who have got no promotion for a long period. Learned counsel for the appellants has very fairly submitted that this issue stands conclusively answered by this Court in Ramesh Dahiya v. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited 2008(3) Recent Service Judgments 186. Learned counsel submits that since in the above said case, the appellant/defendant No.1 was also a party, he will not be able to persuade this Court to record a dissenting note. In view of the very fair stand taken by learned counsel for the appellants, this Court will be hesitant to disturb the concurrent findings of Regular Second Appeal No. 3100 of 2011 4 fact, recorded by both the Courts below, especially when no point of law, much less a substantial one, arises for consideration of this Court, during the course of arguments. Hence no interference is warranted in the present appeal and the same is hereby dismissed, in limine. Civil Misc. No. 8509-C of 2011 The main appeal has been dismissed on merits. Hence, no orders are called for in this application and the same is disposed of as such. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge July 28, 2011 “DK”