CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5506 OF 2010 :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: AUGUST 04, 2011 Sh.Ram Dhan Sharma .....Petitioner VERSUS The State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr. John Kumar, Advocate for Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana, for the State. Mr. R. S. Budhwar, Advocate for Mr. R. S. Rana, Advocate, for respondent No.5. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. Earlier Shaheed Udham Singh National College, Matak Majri, Indri, District Karnal, was a private Institute and was taken over by the Government with effect from 17.5.2005. Two reasons have been disclosed to deny the prayer of the petitioner for grant of grade after the College was taken over by the Government. Firstly, it is CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5506 OF 2010 :{ 2 }: stated that the petitioner was not paid salary in the grade of ` 2200- 4000 for the period from 16.1.1999 to 18.11.2001 by the College and the entries of the same were also not made in the service book of the petitioner. Secondly, it is stated that during the termination period with effect from 19.11.2001 to 18.12.2001, the petitioner was not paid any salary. It is, thus, prayed that this period can not be counted for the purpose of granting senior/Selection Grade. Reliance is placed on Government notification dated 8.12.2000. As per counsel for the respondents, the petitioner was paid lump-sum salary of `4000/- per month and was not paid any grade of pay. To rebut the second limb of the submission made, counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the petitioner was reinstated with continuity of service. Merely because the petitioner was not given a selection grade but was paid lump-sum salary, apparently would not sound a good ground for not counting his service for the purpose of grant of selection grade. The fact remains that the petitioner was in service and if for some unjustified reasons, the College was not giving him pay in the selection grade, the same can not lead to excluding this period for the purpose of grant of selection grade. Once the petitioner has been granted continuity of service by the Court, the action of the respondents in excluding the service for the period with effect from 19.11.2001 to 18.12.2001 is not justified. Counsel for respondent No.5 has also not been able to clarify whether the petitioner was working on an aided post prior to the College being taken over by the Government. It is not understood CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5506 OF 2010 :{ 3 }: as to why the petitioner has been taken in service if he was not working against a post. To me, it does not appear to be a valid reason to deny the benefit to the petitioner. Accordingly, the case of the petitioner is made out for re-consideration of the issue in the light of observations made above. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondents to re-consider the claim of the petitioner for grant of selection grade by treating the abovesaid period of his service to be countable for the said purpose. August 04, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE