High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh
Case Law Search
The Chairman, Punjab Mandi Board, Chandi v. Ram Dass - RSA-3675-2005  RD-P&H 842 (16 February 2006)
R.S.A. No. 3675 of 2005
Date of Decision: January 31, 2006
The Chairman, Punjab Mandi Board, Chandigarh and others
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL.
Present:- Mr. Puneet Gupta, Advocate
for the appellants.
Mr. S.P. Verma, Advocate,
for the respondent.
VINEY MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
The claim of the plaintiff seeking declaration that he was entitled for promotion to the post of Supervisor Grade-I w.e.f. November 8, 1989, when his juniors had been promoted, was dismissed by the learned trial Court. However, the learned first Appellate Court in appeal filed by the plaintiff partly decreed the aforesaid claim and directed the defendants to consider the claim of the plaintiff for promotion to the post of Supervisor Grade-I on the basis of seniority-cum-merit by ignoring the letter dated November 17, 1997 issued by the Chief Engineer, Punjab Mandi Board and pass a speaking order.
R.S.A. No. 3675 of 2005 
Sh. Puneet Gupta, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants has argued that in fact, certain observations have been made by the learned first Appellate Court in holding that since the grades of Chowkidar and Helper are same, therefore, the plaintiff who was a Chowkidar could not be equated with that of Helper. The learned counsel contends that the aforesaid observations infact would amount to prejudging the controversy in question.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the observations made by the learned first Appellate Court, the present appeal is disposed of with a direction to the appellant- defendants to reconsider the claim of the plaintiff for promotion to the post of Supervisor Grade- I on the basis of seniority-cum-merit, in accordance with law. It is, however, directed that while reconsidering the claim of the plaintiff, any observations made by the learned trial Court or by the learned first Appellate Court shall not be taken into consideration. A speaking order shall be passed on the claim of the plaintiff within six months from the date a certified copy of the order is received. In case, the claim of the plaintiff is found to be meritorious, then necessary consequential benefits shall flow to the plaintiff.
January 31, 2006 (VINEY MITTAL)
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.