LPA No.1148 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No.1148 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 14.02.2011 Jagdish Chander … Appellant Versus State of Haryana and Others … Respondents ***** CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN 1. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. AK Bura, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Aman Chaudhary, Addl. AG, Haryana. ***** M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. The instant appeal filed under Clause X of the Letter Patent is directed against short order dated 09.11.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge rejecting the prayer of the appellant for grant of selection grade with effect from the date persons junior to him have been granted. It has come on the record that the appellant-petitioner has joined as JBT Teacher on 06.12.1961 and has claimed that he was senior to S/Sh. Fateh Singh and Parma Nand. In between he might have become junior to them but on 02.11.1989 (R-2/1), the seniority list was corrected and Fateh Singh and Parma Nand were shown as his junior. Therefore, the claim made was that once Fateh Singh and Parma Nand have been granted the selection grade who were his juniors, then the same benefit could not be denied to him. The learned Single Judge has rejected the claim on the ground of delay holding that the claim was made for grant of selection grade from 1972, whereas the writ petition was filed in the year, 1990. LPA No.1148 of 2010 (O&M) -2- 2. It has come on the record that the appellant had been granted the benefit of selection grade from 01.04.1979 and not from the date when the persons junior to him namely S/Sh. Fateh Singh and Parma Nand were given the selection grade. According to the learned State counsel, the aforesaid two persons were incorrectly granted the selection grade but it has been withdrawn vide order dated 21.05.1990. It is appropriate to mention that the selection grade was sanctioned to them vide letter dated 05.09.1974 w.e.f. 15.09.1973. It is true that the selection grade granted to the junior of the appellant- petitioner namely S/Sh. Fateh Singh and Parma Nand was withdrawn vide order dated 21.05.1990. However, when the order was challenged before this Court by the aforesaid beneficiaries by filing CWP No.9287 of 1990, the respondent-State made the statement that the orders were withdrawn. In other words, the benefit of selection grade which was withdrawn from S/Sh. Fateh Singh and Parma Nand was restored to them. We have summoned the original record of CWP No.9287 of 1990 and perused the order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench on 29.11.1990. The same would read as under: “It has been stated by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents that the impugned order has since been withdrawn and the writ petition has become infructuous. Dismissed as such.” (emphasis added) 3. There is thus, no doubt left that once the respondent-State has accepted the grant of benefit to the junior of the appellant-petitioner like S/Sh. Fateh Singh and Parma Nand, then there is no escape from the conclusion that the appellant-petitioner would also be entitled to the same benefit. Therefore, the basic hurdle created by the withdrawal of order granting selection grade to the juniors of the appellant-petitioner has been removed. The benefit has to LPA No.1148 of 2010 (O&M) -3- flow to the appellant-petitioner with effect from the same date as was given to his juniors. It has come on record that the juniors of the appellant-petitioner were given the benefit w.e.f. 15.09.1973. 4. The rejection of the claim made by the appellant-petitioner dismissing his petition on the ground of delay is wholly unwarranted because the benefit of monetary relief would give rise to cause of action everyday. Moreover, the writ petition was filed in the year 1990 and it would be wholly undesirable to non-suit the appellant-petitioner on the ground of delay after a period of 20 years. Therefore, we are not impressed with the view taken by the learned Single Judge and hold that the delay would not constitute basis for rejection of the claim made by the appellant-petitioner. 5. As a sequel to the above discussion, the judgement dated 09.11.2009 rendered by the learned Single Judge is set aside and a direction is issued to respondent No.2 to grant the benefit of selection grade to the appellant-petitioner from 15.09.1973 fixing his pay notionally. On that basis, the appellant-petitioner shall be entitled to arrears for a period of 3 years and 2 months preceding the date of filing of the petition which was filed somewhere in March, 1990. Let the arrear be calculated after refixing the pay notionally and the same be paid to the appellant-petitioner at the earliest but not later than three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. ( M.M. KUMAR ) JUDGE FEBRUARY 14, 2011 ( T.P.S. MANN) rajan JUDGE