Punjab-Haryana High Court
Dr. Devinder Pal Singh Sehgal vs State Of Punjab on 28 February, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:030824
CWP-1909-2019 2024:PHHC:030824
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
302
CWP No. 1909-2019
Date of decision: 28.02.2024
Dr. Devinder Pal Singh Sehgal ....Petitioner
vs.
State of Punjab and ors. ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY
Present: Mr. Satnam Singh Ahluwalia, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Swapan Shorey, D.A.G, Punjab.
***
AMAN CHAUDHARY. J.
1. The prayer in the present Civil Writ Petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, is for directing the respondents to grant the petitioner pay grade scale of Assistant Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Punjab, for the period he has worked and performed the duties of higher post as Assistant Director (Ballistics) FSL, Punjab.
2. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner, who was working as Scientific Officer (Chemistry) was assigned additional charge as against a vacant post of Assistant Director (Ballistics) vide order dated 01.04.2008, Annexure P1 and thereafter, continued to perform the duties of the said higher post till 26.03.2012, Annexure P3 even after being regularly promoted as Assistant Director (Chemistry). Despite there not being any condition to the same in the order dated 01.04.2008, he has, however, not been granted financial benefit for performing additional duties on the higher post. He was entitled to be paid the salary for the said post in terms of Rule 4.22 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules 1 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 05-03-2024 22:31:03 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:030824 CWP-1909-2019 2024:PHHC:030824 2 Vol-I (Part I), amendment vide Notification dated 14.12.2006, read with Section Sr. No.24 of Rule 15.1 of the Rules, as granted to a similarly placed officer- Balwinder Singh Bhundal, who was working as Deputy Director, Forensic Science Laboratory and was given the additional charge of higher post of Director vide order dated 02.07.2012, Annexure P9. But the claim of the petitioner for the same was rejected vide order dated 11.10.2018. Further submission is that 3 posts of Assistant Director in Forensic Science Laboratory stood upgraded as Deputy Director w.e.f 01.10.2011, in view of implementation of recommendation of the 5th Pay Commission, in the revised scale, which was not granted to the petitioner.
3. On the other hand, learned State counsel states that as a stop gap arrangement, the petitioner was granted additional charge solely on a temporary basis for the smooth functioning of the division, without any financial gain, as has been referred to in Annexure R1.
4. Heard learned counsel on either side.
5. Pertinently in the instant case, the petitioner being the senior most in his cadre possessed the requisite qualification i.e. M.Sc Hon's and M.Phil in Chemistry and experience for the post of Assistant Director, both in ballistics as well as chemistry. Therefore, together with his own duties, the Department on an administrative basis, assigned him the additional charge of his promotional post of Assistant Director (Ballistics) w.e.f 01.04.2008, it being vacant, whereon he continued to work and thereafter was granted regular promotion as Assistant Director (Chemistry) w.e.f 26.03.2012, whereby he performed duties of two posts albeit without any emoluments for the additional duty. In this regard the resistance offered to non-entitlement was by attempting to canvas, based on the proposal dated 27.02.2008, for granting temporary charge to the petitioner for the 2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 05-03-2024 22:31:04 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:030824 CWP-1909-2019 2024:PHHC:030824 3 post of Assistant Director (Ballistics), as he had previously worked as Scientific Assistant in Ballistics division for many years, in order to streamline the functioning of these divisions and to cut short the time used up in appearances before the Court of law, without financial gain. Be that as it may, in the order dated 01.04.2008, Annexure P-1, by which the additional charge was given to the petitioner, there was no such stipulation regarding non grant of financial benefits. Thus, depriving him of the pay grade scale and pay scale for the duration he served on the higher post, notably, in addition to the duties of the post held by him, can by no stretch be said to be justified, even if there had been any condition mentioned therein, as held in State of Punjab & another vs. Dharam Pal, 2017 (9) SCC 395, wherein the respondent, who was officiating on higher posts and therefore performing the duties of a higher responsibility attached to the same, was held entitled to salary and pay scale of the said post, by Hon'ble the Supreme Court. It was further observed that mere incorporation or undertaking in the order as to non-entitlement to extra financial gain, would not debar an employee from claiming the benefits of the said officiating position.
6. In State of Haryana and another vs. Pardeep Narayan, LPA- 1629-2023, decided on 06.11.2023, wherein the respondent was assigned duty of a higher post by the Department on its own volition, thus, having performed duties and responsibilities of the higher post, the Division Bench held him entitled to the benefit of the salary for the said period by observing that even a condition to the effect that he was not entitled to the pay scale of the said higher post, was not to be treated as an impediment.
7. Insofar as the second prayer of the petitioner is concerned of upgradation of the post of Assistant Director as Deputy Director, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that certain officials have already been granted this 3 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 05-03-2024 22:31:04 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:030824 CWP-1909-2019 2024:PHHC:030824 4 benefit. In this regard, he on instructions submits that the petitioner shall submit a representation to notify the Department of the aforesaid facts along with the relevant documents, which he prays, be directed to be decided in a time bound manner, to which the learned State counsel has no objection.
8. In view of the aforesaid, the present petition is partly allowed, with a direction to the Department to compute and release the arrears of salary as per the pay scale of the post of Assistant Director (Ballistics) for the period the petitioner performed duties thereon, within a period of one month. However, as regards the second prayer, without commenting upon the merits of the case, in case the petitioner submits a representation as stated by him, in a period of one month, the respondents are directed to consider and decide the same, taking note of the pleas raised, within a period of six months and if found entitled, necessary benefit be granted forthwith. However, in the eventuality of the relief being denied, a speaking order be passed, after associating the petitioner.
(AMAN CHAUDHARY)
JUDGE
28.02.2024
G Arora
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:030824
4 of 4
::: Downloaded on - 05-03-2024 22:31:04 :::