Power Corporation Ltd. and others Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. and others v. Lachhman Singh Lachhman Singh
Case Details
2016 (O&M) RSA-6904-2016 (O&M) Sr. No.103+212 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH RSA RSA-6904-2016 (O&M) Date of Decision : 21.04.2025 Date of Decision : State Power Corporation Ltd. and others …Appellants State Power Corporation Ltd. and others Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. and others Versus Lachhman Singh Lachhman Singh …Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Present : Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate, Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate, for the appellants. for the appellant Mr. Mohinder Pal, Advocate, Mr. Mohinder Pal, Advocate, for the respondent. for the respondent. *** LAPITA BANERJI, J. (Oral) LAPITA BANERJI 2025 CM-4283-C-2025 This is an application for placing on record the letter dated This is an application for placing on record the letter dated This is an application for placing on record the letter dated 21.08.2018 as Annexure A-6. 21.08.2018 as Annexure A Application is allowed, as prayed for. Application is allowed, as prayed for. Application is allowed, as prayed for. 6 is taken on record, subject to all Document at Annexure A-6 is taken on record, subject to all Document just exceptions. just exceptions. Main case Under challenge in the present regular second appeal is the Under challenge in the present regular second appeal is the Under challenge in the present regular second appeal is the judgment and decree dated May 25, 2015 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. judgment and decree dated May 25, 2015 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. judgment and decree dated May 25, 2015 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Patiala and the judgment dated March 29, 2016 passed by the Divn.), Patiala and the judgment dated March 29, 2016 passed by the Divn.), Patiala and the judgment dated March 29, 2016 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Patiala. learned Additional District Judge, Patiala. 2. Vide impugned judgment and decree dated May 25, 2015, the Vide impugned judgment and decree dated May 25, 2015, the Vide impugned judgment and decree dated May 25, 2015, the
Legal Reasoning
learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) Patiala held in favour of the plaintiff- learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) Patiala held in favour of the plaintiff learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) Patiala held in favour of the plaintiff Respondent and declared the order dated September 17, 2010 withdrawing and declared the order dated September 17, 2010 withdrawing the promotional increments granted to the plaintiff with effect from March the promotional increments granted to the plaintiff with effect from March the promotional increments granted to the plaintiff with effect from March effecting recovery of Rs.1,18,074/- 1, 1998, effecting recovery of Rs.1,18,074/ - from the leave encashment VANDANA 2025.04.23 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page 1 of 4 2016 (O&M) RSA-6904-2016 (O&M) benefits, reducing his pay with effect from March 1, 1998 and reducing his pay with effect from March 1, 1998 and reducing his pay with effect from March 1, 1998 and consequently grant of less pensionary benefits to the plaintiff, to be illegal, consequently grant of less pensionary benefits consequently grant of less pensionary benefits null and void. null and void. 3. The appellants-defendants (employer) we The appellants defendants (employer) were directed to grant with effect from March 1, 1998 and promotional increment after 23 years, with effect from March 1, 1998 and promotional increment revise the pensionary benefits with effect from December 1, 2010 after revise the pensionary b enefits with effect from December 1, 2010 after the grant of promotional increment. promotional increment. A sum of Rs.1,18,074/ A sum of Rs.1,18,074/- was directed to be refunded to the plaintiff along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date refunded to the plaintiff along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date refunded to the plaintiff along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of institution of the suit till its realization. of institution of the suit till its realization. 4. ide judgment dated March 29, 2016, the First Appellate Vide judgment dated March 29, 2016, the First Appellate V Court dismissed the appeal with costs. It held that the plaintiff’s case fell Court dismissed the appeal with costs. It held that the plaintiff Court dismissed the appeal with costs. It held that the plaintiff within the purview of the scheme notified by the within the purview of the scheme notified by the Circular No.17/90 dated April 23, 1990 and the plaintiff was entitled to benefits upon completion of April 23, 1990 and the plaintiff was entitled to b April 23, 1990 and the plaintiff was entitled to b 23 years of his his service. 5. It was held that as per clause 7 of the Scheme, the plaintiff was It was held that as per clause 7 of the Scheme, the plaint It was held that as per clause 7 of the Scheme, the plaint entitled to promotional increment promotional increment after 23 years of service after 23 years of service and it was irrelevant whether the plaintiff had a diploma of 2 years or more or irrelevant whether the plaintiff had a diploma of 2 years or mo irrelevant whether the plaintiff had a diploma of 2 years or mo departmental examination. Therefore, whether the plaintiff had cleared the departmental examination. Therefore, whether the plaintiff the First Appellate Court did not interfere with the findings of the trial the First Appellate Court did not interfere with the finding the First Appellate Court did not interfere with the finding of the trial Court. Court and affirmed the judgment of the trial Court. Court and affirmed the 6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants fairly Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the submits that the issue with regard to grant of promotional increment submits that t with regard to grant of promotional increment has already been decided by a C been decided by a Coordinate Bench in CWP oordinate Bench in CWP-11398-2016 vide “Prem Kumar Kapoor and another Vs. The order dated April 11, 2019 “Prem Kumar Kapoor and another Vs. The order dated April 11, 2019 Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and another Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and another”. VANDANA 2025.04.23 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page 2 of 4 2016 (O&M) RSA-6904-2016 (O&M) 7. The case of Prem Kumar Kapoor The case of Prem Kumar Kapoor (supra) was decided relying on a judgment dated November 29, 2018 passed by another relying on a judgment dated November 29, 2018 passed by a relying on a judgment dated November 29, 2018 passed by a Balvir Singh Vs. PSPCL and coordinate Bench in CWP No.1013-2017 “Balvir Singh Vs. PSPCL and coordinate Bench in CWP No.1013 along with other connected writ petitions. another” along with other connected writ petitions. along with other connected writ petitions. 8.
Legal Reasoning
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the Corporation itself took a R the Corporation itself took a Resolution on esolution on August 21, 2018 which reads as follows:- reads as follows: “Resolved that officers/Employees/Retirees whose “Resolved that officers/Employees/Retirees whose 23 years advance promotional increment falls due from 23 years advance promotional increment falls due fr 23 years advance promotional increment falls due fr 16.12.1991 to 17.03.2010 be allowed the same from the due 16.12.1991 to 17.03.2010 be allowed the same from the due 16.12.1991 to 17.03.2010 be allowed the same from the due date as per instructions issued vide F.C. No.62/1992 dated date as per instructions issued vide F.C. No.62/1992 dated date as per instructions issued vide F.C. No.62/1992 dated 16.12.1992. 16.12.1992. increment increment increment Further resolved that the pay/pension of the Further resolved that the pay/pension of the years Advance Officer/Employees/Retirees whose years Advance Officer/Employees/Retirees whose years Advance Officer/Employees/Retirees whose Promotional to falls due Promotional falls falls Promotional 17.03.2010 shall be fixed notionally and no arrear on account 17.03.2010 shall be fixed notionally and no arrear on account 17.03.2010 shall be fixed notionally and no arrear on account of pay, pension, gratuity leave encashment and commutation of of pay, pension, gratuity leave encashment and commutation of of pay, pension, gratuity leave encashment and commutation of pension etc. will be paid and only the financial benefit on pension etc. will be paid and only the financial benefit on pension etc. will be paid and only the financial benefit on account of difference of pay/pension fixed notionally shall be account of difference of pay/pension fixed notion account of difference of pay/pension fixed notion allowed from the date of notification (Circular) by PSPCL.” allowed from the date of notification (Circular) by PSPCL.” allowed from the date of notification (Circular) by PSPCL.” 23 23 23 from 16.12.1992 9. Furthermore, a subsequent decision was taken by the Board of Furthermore, a subsequent decision was taken by the Board of Furthermore, a subsequent decision was taken by the Board of Corporation on October 1, 2018, which reads as under: appellant No.1-Corporation on October 1, 2018, which reads as under: appellant No.1 that that following amendments following amendments “Resolved in existing in existing “Resolved instructions regarding grant of 23 years advance instructions regarding grant of 23 years advance promotional increment issued vide FC No.20/2000 dated promotional increment issued vide FC No.20/2000 dated 28.07.2000, FC No.53/2011 dated 18.11.2011 for for 28.07.2000, FC No.53/2011 dated 18.11.2011 employees and FC No.54/2011 dated 18.11.2011 for employees and FC No.54/2011 dated 18.11.2011 for officers along with exemption of passing of departmental officers along with exemption of passing of departmental examination, if any, be and is hereby approved with examination, if any, be and is hereby approved with effect from the date of issue of notification (Finance effect from the date of issue of notification (Finance Circular) by PSPCL: XXX XXX XXX” XXX 10. Therefore, the appellant No.1-Corporation Therefore, the appellant No.1 Corporation did not have any objection to the payment of arrears of fina objection to the payment of arrears of financial benefits for advance promotional increment to the respondent-plaintiff as long as the promotional increment plaintiff as long as the same were restricted to 36 months from the date of filing of the suit. Learned counsel restricted to 36 months from the date of filing of the suit. restricted to 36 months from the date of filing of the suit. VANDANA 2025.04.23 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page 3 of 4 2016 (O&M) RSA-6904-2016 (O&M) for the respondent also accepts the fair suggestion made by learned counsel for the respondent also accepts the fair suggestion made by learned counsel for the respondent also accepts the fair suggestion made by learned counsel or the appellants. for the appellants. 11. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. material on record. 12. Taking into consideration the orders passed by the Coordinate Taking into consideration the orders pass Taking into consideration the orders pass Benches in CWP-11398-2016 and CWP-1013 Benches in CWP 1013-2017, this Court disposes of the present regular second appeal by directing the appellant the present regular second appeal by directing the appellants to pay the arrears of advance advance promotional increment promotional increment of 23 years of service as to the respondent within three months from determined by the appellants, to the respondent within three months from determined by the appellant the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 13. The benefits will be restricted to 36 months Th e benefits will be restricted to 36 months prior to the date of filing of the suit. filing of the suit. 14. After computation the actual benefits After actual benefits/arrears payable by the the same should be disbursed within three months from the date the same should be disbursed within employer, the same should be disbursed within failing which the said amount of receipt of the certified copy of the order, failing which the said amount of receipt of the certified copy would carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of accrual of the would carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of accrual of the would carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of accrual of the arrears till the date of realization. arrears till the date of realization. With the aforesaid directions, RSA No.6904-2016 is disposed With the aforesaid directions, RSA No. With the aforesaid directions, RSA No. are also accordingly disposed Connected applications, if any, are also accordingly disposed Connected applications, if any, 15. of. 16. of. (LAPITA BANERJI) (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE JUDGE April 21, 202 Vandana 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned : ther speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable : Whether reportable Yes/No Yes/No VANDANA 2025.04.23 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page 4 of 4