Constitution of India, Article 226, 309, 311 -- Disciplinary proceedings against deceased employee – Recovery from leave encashment – Permissibility of -- Before the disciplinary proceedings could reach to its conclusion, the husband of the petitioner died -- Continuing the disciplinary proceedings after his death so as to hold him guilty of the allegations and to pass an order of punishment so as to recover money, cannot be sustained and is accordingly set aside --  Order against a dead employee is void – Petition allowed, respondents directed to release the amount of Rs.3,14,460/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the due date till the actual payment of the same.

(Para 4, 12-15)

Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, Rule 2(g), 17(2) – Contractual employee – Regularisation – Continuation of past service for pension -- Rule 17 was engrafted essentially to cater to the eventuality, where the employees working on contract basis were regularized at a later stage -- It is only for the purposes of pension that the past service as a contractual employee is to be taken into account.

(Para 9)

Punjab Revenue Patwaris Class III Service Rules, 1966, Rule 15 --  Constitution of India, Article 14 – Splitting of post of Patwari -- Junior Patwari – Senior Patwari – Different pay scale – Permissibility of – By notification post of Patwari split in two parts; Junior and Senior Patwaris and further different pay scales have been allocated to Senior Patwaris and Junior Patwaris as 1350-2400 and 950-1800 with different allowances by dividing the total number of posts of Patwari to 50% each – There is no bifurcation in the Rules of selection and appointment of Patwaris into Senior and Junior Patwaris -- Method of appointment is same for all Patwaris -- Seniority inter se members of the service is maintained district-wise and is to be determined by the length of continuous service – Question of delay raised -- Petitioners suffer continuous wrong -- Notification violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India as similarly placed persons have been classified differently without their being any basis -- Notification is thus, arbitrary and is accordingly quashed and set aside to the extent of dividing the Patwaris in two categories and granting two different pay scales -- All the petitioners will have to be placed in the higher pay scale of 1350-2400.

(Para 1, 9-19)

Constitution of India, Article 14, 226 – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Section 34 -- Interest on arrears of salary/ pension -- Once, a similarly situated employee allowed the benefit of interest by the Department, the same needs to be extended to the mother of the petitioner also on the arrears of salary/pension -- Denial will amount to discrimination, which cannot be permitted – Petitioner held entitled for interest on the arrears which have already been released to the mother of the petitioner @ 6% per annum from the date the payment became due till the actual disbursement of the same.

(Para 6, 9-11)

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Section 100 -- Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (20 of 1958), Section 12 – Conviction of employee –Probation – Termination of service -- Appellant ordered to be released on probation of good conduct -- Employee cannot claim a right to continue in service merely on the ground that he has been given benefit of probation – Appeal dismissed.

(Para 2, 6)

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Re-imbursement of Medical treatment expenses – Treatment at Government Hospital -- Total expenditure incurred on the treatment of petitioner is Rs.4,17,004/- -- Respondent-Department cannot restrict the reimbursement to Rs.1,10,044/- -- Implant which was used on recommendations of the Doctors, who conducted the surgery cost Rs.2,75,000/-, the said amount incurred by the petitioner cannot be deducted to mean that only Rs.45,000/- will be reimbursed -- Petition allowed and the respondents directed to reimburse the total medical bills submitted by the petitioner as verified by the Medical Superintendent of the Medical College.

(Para 8-12)

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), Section 2(oo)(bb), 25H -- Bombay Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Rules, 1959, Clause 4C, 32 – Standing order for employment -- Certified standing orders have a statutory force -- Standing Order implies a contract between the employer and the workman -- Employer and workman cannot enter into a contract overriding the statutory contract embodied in the certified Standing Orders -- A cumulative reading of clauses reveals that a workman who has worked for 240 days in an establishment would be entitled to be made permanent, and no contract/ settlement which abridges such a right can be agreed upon, let alone be binding -- The Act being the beneficial legislation provides that any agreement/ contract/ settlement wherein the rights of the employees are waived off would not override the Standing Orders -- Appellant-Union held entitled to all benefits per the Bombay Model Standing Order.

(Para 7-18)

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Compassionate appointment to married daughter -- Source of earning of husband of the petitioner would have no reason for consideration while considering the application of the petitioner -- Petition allowed, respondents directed to consider the application of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds, after death of her father -- If otherwise found suitable, appointment ordered to be offered to her.

(Para 6-8)

Constitution of  India, Article 16, 226 -- Appointment of PGT Teacher -- Reservation -- Firstly all the open category seats shall be filled then the individual category of any candidate and it is thereafter reserved category seats shall be filled – It is not the case of the respondents that the petitioner has taken any additional advantage of being belonged to the SC (R&O) category – Held, merit was required to be placed in the general category.

(Para 11, 13)

A. Constitution of India, Article 14, 16, 226 -- Appointment of Extension Lecturers from retired employee/ non-retired employee – Discrimination in pay – Sustainability of – Petitioners/ Retired employee are fully eligible for being appointed as extension lecturers and they are performing the same duties -- Held, payment of lesser remuneration to the retired teachers/petitioners amounts to practising discrimination against them and treating equals as unequals which cannot be permitted -- Respondents cannot shrink from the duty to pay equally for the same work done by them in compliance of the Constitutional mandate of equality enshrined in Articles 14 and 16 – Writ petition allowed.  

(Para 6)

B. Constitution of India, Article 14, 16, 226 -- Policy guidelines regarding engaging Eligible Extension Lecturers in Govt. Colleges purely on work requirement basis, dated 04.03.2020, Clause 11 -- Clause/paragraph 11 of the Policy dated 04.03.2020 is illegal being irrational and arbitrary – Clause 11 quashed.

(Para 6, 8)

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), Section 10(1)(c), 17-A -- Industrial dispute -- Ex-parte award – functus officio -- Application for setting aside ex-parte award was rejected by holding that after the award become enforceable, the Labour Court become functus officio – Held, the Labour Court is not functus officio after the award has become enforceable as far as setting aside an ex-parte award is concerned – Order passed by Labour Court set aside.

(Para 13, 14)

Constitution of India, Article 136 -- Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, Rule 14 -- Retired employee as Enquiry officer – Permissibility of -- Disciplinary authority is empowered to appoint a retired employee as an inquiry authority -- It is not necessary that the inquiry officer should be a public servant -- Urged that disciplinary authority had not recorded specific reasons why a retired government servant was appointed to act as an inquiry officer – Argument rejected as a belated afterthought -- This submission should not be entertained before this Court, post the inquiry etc.

(Para 6)

A. Employees’ Compensation Act 1923, (8 of 1923), Section 2(1)(I), 4(1)(b) -- Total disablement – Functional disability -- If the disablement incurred in an accident incapacitates a workman for all work which he was capable of performing at the time of the accident resulting in such disablement, the disablement would be taken as total for the purposes of award of compensation under section 4(1)(b) of the Act regardless of the injury sustained being not one as specified in Part I of Schedule I of the Act.

(Para 28)

B. Employees’ Compensation Act 1923, (8 of 1923), Section 2(1)(i), 4(1)(b) -- Total disablement – Functional disability --  On the basis of medical certificate provided by the Board, the Commissioner found the appellant unfit for labour inasmuch as there was complete loss of grip in appellant’s left hand -- Prior to the accident, the appellant worked as a loading/unloading labourer -- Such a task is ordinarily performed by using both hands -- When the Board had certified that the appellant was rendered unfit for labour, there was no perversity in the decision of the Commissioner in awarding compensation by treating the disability as total on account of her functional disability – Held, High Court erred  in assessing the disability as 40% instead of 100%, as assessed by the Commissioner.

(Para 29-31)

A. Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923), Section 30 – Appeal – Substantial question of law -- Appeal u/s 30 of the Act, can be maintained only when a substantial question of law is involved in the appeal -- Contentions that there was no relationship of employer and employee between the parties and the deceased was on a private visit and not on an official duty, the same cannot be considered as substantial question of law being factual issues.

(Para 8, 9)

B. Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923), Section 4A(3a) – Interest on compensation -- Contention that interest @12% per annum cannot be granted, held, in terms of sub-section-3(a) of Section 4A of the Act, simple interest @12% per annum is payable from the date of incident. Shobha’s case 2022 AIR(SC) 1410 relied.

 (Para 11)

C. Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923), Section 3 – Negligence of employee -- Section 3 of E.C Act does not create any exception of the kind, which permits the employer to avoid his liability if there was negligence on the part of workman – Contention that deceased died because of his own negligence, appellant/ employer cannot be held responsible for compensating the legal representatives of the deceased, rejected.

(Para 11)

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Promotion as Assistant Engineer (Civil) – Pendency of criminal case -- FIR u/s 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of IPC and Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act – Result of the petitioner kept in sealed cover – Closure report by Police in FIR – Held, sealed cover procedure was wrongly adopted by the respondents – Writ petition allowed, respondents directed to open the sealed cover and in case the petitioner is found eligible for promotion, all consequential benefits shall be given to him from the due date.

(Para 3-5)

Punjab State Education Class III (School Cadre) Service Rules 1978 -- ETT teacher -- Promotion to the post of Hindi Master – In terms of the circular, those employees of JBT/ETT cadre who are regular up to the cut-off date (for Hindi, it is 31.12.2006), would be entitled for consideration – Qualification required as on date of consideration -- Petitioner passed B.Ed examination on 23.08.2007 and when the case of the petitioner was to be considered i.e. in 2015, he possessed the requisite educational qualification – Respondent treated the cut off date for qualification as of regularisation – Held, denial of consideration for promotion to the petitioner is wrongful and unjustified -- Respondents directed to consider the case of the petitioner on the post of Hindi Master and if otherwise found suitable, promote petitioner from the date his juniors with all consequential benefits.

(Para 7-12)

A. Employees’ Compensation Act 1923 (8 of 1923), Section 4, 4A – Compensating to employee -- Employer commits a default in making the payment of compensation within one month from the date it fell due i.e. date of accident -- Commission is under an obligation to direct the employer to pay in addition to the amount of compensation, the simple interest @ 12% per annum or at such higher rate not exceeding the maximum of the lending rates of any scheduled bank -- Commissioner if finds that there is no justification for the delay, it shall direct the employer to pay in addition a further sum not exceeding 50% of such amount by way of penalty -- Commissioner omitted to consider the claim of the workmen for payment of interest -- Employer failed to meet its obligation u/s 4 of the Act – Workmen held entitled to interest @ 12% per annum on the amount of compensation adjudicated by the Commissioner w.e.f. 26th July, 2004, i.e., the date of accident -- Penalty of 10% of the awarded amount also imposed upon employer.

(Para 24-29)

B. Employees’ Compensation Act 1923 (8 of 1923), Section 4, 4A(3) -- Interest and penalty – Liability of employer/ Insurer -- Liability to pay interest or penalty u/s 4A(3) -- Insurance contract to indemnify the employer in respect of payment of compensation cannot ipso facto extend to the payment of interest and penalty, unless there is a specific contract of insurance between the employer and the insurer.

(Para 25)

Constitution of India, Article 226, 227 – Delayed payment of arrears -- Writ petition claiming interest -- Petitioner was paid arrears of Rs.8,44,618/- for the period from 06.11.2017 to 05.01.2020 in September 2021, with a delay of 20 months -- In writ jurisdiction, direction given to respondent to consider and decide legal notice and pass a speaking order within 03 months.

(Para 1-4)

Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependent to the Deceased Employee Rules 2006 -- Deemed regularisation – Compassionate appointment -- Husband of Petitioner regularized on service, however implementation was deferred due to pendency of some writ petition and also in view of his seniority position -- Before implementation of regularization, husband expired -- Husband of petitioner has to be treated as a regular employee in service at the time of his death and one of the petitioners is entitled for the benefit of compassionate assistance under the Policy of 2006 -- Writ petition disposed of by directing the respondents No.2 to consider the case of the petitioners in accordance with law and do the needful preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

(Para 16-18)

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (30 of 1956), Section 8 -- Indian Succession Act, 1925 (39 of 1925), Section 372 – Retiral benefits of deceased employee – Legal heirs -- Succession certificate -- Deceased nowhere mentioned in his entire service record of the petitioner being his wife – Retiral benefits can be settled only after a competent Civil Court gives a declaration -- Procedure for obtaining succession certificate in this regard has been laid down under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 as well as Hindu Succession Act, 1956 -- Petitioner would have to get the said competent declaration from the competent court.

(Para 4, 6)

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Interest on the amount of Contributory Pension Scheme Fund – Amount released to the petitioners pursuant to death of their husbands – Petition disposed, with a direction to DGP to consider legal notice and to decide the same in light of ratio of judgment of the Court in CWP-35361-2019 titled as Constable Bikramjit Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others expeditiously preferably within a period of four weeks.

(Para 1-5)

A. Constitution of India, Article 226, 227 -- Abolition of post -- An employer has the sole discretion to decide as to whether a post is to be retained or abolished -- Ground for discontinuation of services is that there was poor intake of students which would warrant no interference by the court -- It is not for High Court to decide what would be an adequate number of students to justify the retention of a teacher.

(Para 13)

B. Guru Gobind Singh Inderprasth University Act, 1988 (9 of 1988), Section 22 -- AIT Service Rules, Rule 20.2 -- Termination of services -- Show cause notice -- Violation of Act/ Rules -- Institute has flouted the Service Rules with great impunity as the Service Rules itself provide for three months’ notice in terms of Rule 20.2 of AIT Service Rules, but Section 22 of the Act of 1988 to which the Institute was affiliated, provided for a show cause notice to be issued before termination which procedure was never followed -- Since there was a violation of Section 22 of the Act of 1988, the termination is illegal and is set aside as well as the order of the Tribunal -- Consequently, respondent No.2 which stands merged with respondent No.3 directed to reinstate the petitioner forthwith with all notional benefits -- In case the petitioner seeks arrears of salary, the respondents would be at liberty to seek information on whether the petitioner had been gainfully employed during the pendency of these proceedings and take an appropriate decision -- Entire exercise regarding entitlement of arrears of salary be completed expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months on the demand being made.

(Para 13)

A. Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 106 -- Industrial dispute – Back wages -- Gainfully employed – Burden of proof -- Initial burden is on the employee to come out with the case that he was not gainfully employed after the order of termination -- An assertion on oath by the employee that he was unemployed, may be sufficient compliance in the absence of any positive material brought on record by the employer.

(Para 7)

B. Industrial dispute – Reinstatement in service – Back wages -- Even if Court passes an order of reinstatement in service, an order of payment of back wages is not automatic -- It all depends on the facts and circumstances of the case.

(Para 9)

C. Industrial dispute – Reinstatement in service – Back wages -- Removal w.e.f. 14th June 1996 – Re-instatement on 23rd July 2009 -- Not possible to accept that for the entire period of thirteen years, the appellant had no source of income -- Respondent has not come out with the case that from the date of his removal from service, the appellant had another source of income -- Appellant establishing that he was unemployed till August 1997 -- Gross salary of the appellant on the date of reinstatement was Rs.18,830/- and on the date of removal, his salary was approximately Rs.4,000/- per month – Rs.3 lakhs ordered to be paid to the appellant in lieu of back wages – If Rs.3 lakhs not paid within two months, the said amount will carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of reinstatement in service.

(Para 1, 4, 10, 11)

Constitution of India, Article 226, 309 -- Punjab Civil Service (Punishment and Appeals) Rules, 1970, Rule 9 – Departmental proceedings -- Re-inquiry – Retiral benefits -- “Whether it is permissible to hold a departmental inquiry after the competent officer has closed the departmental proceedings based on the inquiry report?” – Held, there is no provision in the rules that allows for a re-inquiry after the charges have been dropped by the competent authority in a detailed order -- Principal Secretary has not recorded his reasons to justify such re-inquiry – Writ petition allowed and the impugned orders set aside -- Petitioner is a physically disabled person and on attaining the age of superannuation, retired, hence, the respondents directed to recalculate and release the pensionary benefits of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of next two months.

(Para 10-13)

Constitution of India, Article 226, 227 -- Termination of services – Punishment u/s 354/ 448 of Ranbir Penal Code -- Contention that during service, the petitioner was adorned with 30 rewards including 4 Commendation Cards and punishment of termination of services is harsh and is disproportionate to the alleged offence – Petition disposed of, punishment set aside, matter remanded back to the competent authority to pass afresh order qua quantum of punishment.

(Para 2-4)

Constitution of India, Article 14 – Regularisation of services – Consequential benefits – Discrimination -- 65 persons were found entitled to be regularized -- Act of regularizing the services of only 35 employees and not regularizing the services of other employees is patently discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India -- Services of the appellants directed to be regularized from the date on which the services of other 35 employees were regularized and the backwages and other consequential benefits etc., to which the appellants would be entitled to, shall be paid to them within a period of six months.

(Para 10-13)

A. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), Section 10(1)(d), 25F -- Award of  Industrial Tribunal – Challenge to – Management was not assailing the Award to the extent of directing reinstatement in service and payment of back wages in LPA – Held, it is not open to the management to raise the same before Supreme Court -- Appeal filed by the management of FCI raising these issues dismissed.

(Para 9)

B. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), Section 10(1)(d), 25F -- Award of  Industrial Tribunal – Challenge to – Implementation of award – Effect of -- Management of FCI filed a writ petition challenging the Award having secured conditional interim relief, chose to implement the impugned Award though it was under no compulsion to do so -- Management absorbed them in regular service – Such absorption in service was not at all required under the interim order and was, therefore, squarely attributable to the will and volition of the management of FCI itself -- Its somnolence, thereafter, in taking timely measures for expeditious disposal of the writ petition compounded the matter further, leading to the passing of 18 long years -- Held, having allowed the workmen to put in regular service to its own benefit for over two decades, the management can no longer claim an indefeasible right to continue with and canvass its challenge to the Award, merely because it made its compliance with the Award conditional long ago – Appeal dismissed.

(Para 15-17)

Constitution of India, Article 14, 226 -- Contractual employees -- Regularisation of service -- Class-IV Helpers in Regional Hospital completed more than eight years of service – Services of similarly situated persons, whether initially appointed by Govt. or Rogi Kalyan Samiti had been regularised as per policy of government -- Denial of the relief to the petitioner would amount to sheer discrimination among similar situate persons, which is not permissible under law – Writ allowed, respondents directed to regularize the services of the petitioners strictly as per policy.

(Para 1-6)

Constitution of India, Article 226 – Regularisation of services -- Writ jurisdiction -- Delay and laches -- Impugned order dated 18th July, 2019 – Tribunal allowed O.A. and directed the petitioner to regularize services of the respondent on completion of eight years continuous service with all consequential benefits in accordance with law within two months, while restricting the actual financial benefits to three years prior to filing of O.A -- Challenging the same, writ petition preferred on 24.05.2023, without offering any explanation for the delay in filing the same – Delay not explained satisfactorily -- Writ petition dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.

(Para 1-7)

Punjab Welfare Officers Recruitment and Conditions of Service Rules, 1952, Rule 6, 7, 7A -- Constitution of India, Article 14 -- Termination of service – Violative of rule of natural justice – Re-instatement after age of superannuation – Notional benefits -- Services of the petitioner were terminated, without any notice and reason, by invoking clause 3 of the appointment letter and that too, after the petitioner had worked for 15 years, without any complaint made against him -- Writ petition allowed and consequently orders terminating the services and dismissal of appeal set aside – Petitioner ought to have attained the age of superannuation, deemed to be reinstated from the date of his termination and will be entitled to all notional benefits i.e. pension, gratuity, leave encashment etc., as per relevant service Rules.

(Para 1, 8-11)

Karnataka Education Department Services (Department of Public Instructions) (Recruitment) Rules, 1967 (as amended in 2001), Entry 66 –Additional list/ waiting list – Appointment from – Enlistment of name in the Additional List neither creates a right nor a co-relative obligation for appointment -- High Court committed an error in directing the State to give effect to the Additional List and appoint the respondent – Appeal allowed and the decision of the High Court set aside.

(Para 1, 9-13)

Constitution of India, Article 226, 311 -- Disciplinary proceedings -- Scope of judicial review – Punishment order passed by department upheld in writ petition – In LPA punishment order against respondent no.1 was set aside -- Division Bench of the High Court proceeded to reappreciate the entire evidence as if conviction in a criminal trial was being re-examined by the next higher court -- There was no answer to the finding recorded by the Inquiry Officer in the Inquiry Report that the changed form of quotation contained original signature of respondent no.1 -- The fact that this “Form of quotation” was changed is not in dispute -- When the changed form of quotation also contained signature of respondent no.1, it clearly established his involvement in the tampering of document -- This fact has not even been noticed by the Division Bench of the High Court – Appeal allowed, impugned order passed by the Division Bench set aside.

(Para 3, 7, 8)

Constitution of India, Article 226 – Appointment of Supervisor -- OBC category candidate – Applied as General category candidate – Petitioner was interviewed as a General category candidate and remained unsuccessful as a General category candidate -- Petitioner was not in possession of OBC certificate at the time of applying for the posts – She did not take any legal step for getting the OBC certificate at the relevant time or for consideration of her candidature under OBC category -- Having participated in the selection process through out as a General category candidate and allowing the selection process to culminate, petitioner now cannot be heard to complain that her candidature was required to be considered under OBC category -- Writ petition dismissed.

(Para 2, 5)

A. Policy of Recruitment to Group ‘C’ and ‘D’ for Common Eligibility Test-2022 -- Common Eligibility Test (CET) -- In the policy dt. 05.05.2022, the Common Eligibility Test was introduced to simplify and standardize the recruitment process for Government employment to Group-C posts and Group-D posts -- Consideration of all candidates who have obtained minimum marks in the CET for the skilled test and/or written test would have the effect of relegating the meritorious candidates, and would result in failure of the very objective of the policy particularly when large number of candidates in lakhs appeared for the CET and a substantial number of them had qualified in the CET written examination to the tune of 2,92,000 for the posts in question – Held, clause in the policy providing for shortlisting is in tune with the main objective of inducting meritorious candidates in Government jobs, and limiting the number of meritorious candidates by way of shortlisting would expedite the conducting of examination, evaluation and avoid unnecessary litigation by non-meritorious applicants -- Writ Petitions, dismissed.

(Para 44-56)

B. Policy of Recruitment to Group ‘C’ and ‘D’ for Common Eligibility Test-2022 -- Common Eligibility Test (CET) – Relevancy of subject in exam -- Contention that in the CET, testing was for only General knowledge and computer knowledge, but knowledge in subject was not tested; and so the securing of 70% marks therein for appearing in the skill test/written examination in the relevant subject for the post, cannot be permitted – Held, Commission is an expert body and is competent to decide in consultation with the State departments on what subjects a candidate is to be tested for short listing -- It is not the province of High Court to enter into the domain of the Commission and exercise the power vested in the Commission as High Court does not have the requisite expertise in that regard -- It is not the case of the petitioners that General knowledge or analytical skills tested in the CET are wholly irrelevant for appointment to the posts in question – No merit in the Writ Petitions, dismissed.

(Para 50)

Constitution of India, Article 226 – Writ of mandamus -- Work charge service -- Pensionary benefits – Respondent No.5/ UHBVN endorsing that the period of work charge service rendered by the petitioner under the respondent No.5 from 30.08.1968 to 10.05.1974 – Writ petition disposed of by directing the respondents No.4 and 6 to consider the work charge period for the purpose of re-fixation of pension and other retiral benefits.

(Para 1-4)

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Transfer of employee on recommendation of MLA – Legality of -- Proposal of public representative has to be considered by assessing it on merit in the light of Guiding Principles and Instructions regulating the transfer of employees in consonance with pronouncements of the Court -- Impugned order of transfer passed without application of mind by the Administration Department/Competent Authority, but only on the basis of U.O/D.O Note, generated and communicated at the instance of a person having no role in Administration of Department – Transfer order quashed.

(Para 5)

Constitution of India, Article 16 -- Recruitment exam – Change of category -- General to DESM -- Permissibility of – After having participated in the qualifying examination and having failed to score the minimum requisite marks, seeking change in the category cannot be permitted -- If a candidate applies under a specific category he cannot be permitted to change his category during the selection or midway during the recruitment process.

(Para 6, 7)

Constitution of India, Article 226, 227 -- Common Eligibility Test (CET) -- EWS (Economically Weaker Section) from General Category -- Petitioner had got himself registered, applied and appeared for eligibility test as a General category candidate -- There is a categoric condition in the advertisement that category once filled in cannot be permitted to be changed -- It is well settled that if a candidate applies under a specific category he cannot be permitted to change his category during the selection or midway during the recruitment process.

(Para 6-9)

Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume-II, Rule 6.17(3) – Family pension to mother – Wife already died -- Mother died during the pendency of writ petition -- Mother of deceased employee held entitled for the grant of family pension on the date of death of her son till she died -- LRs will be entitled for disbursement of the same on furnishing necessary certificate form competent authority.

(Para 8, 9)

Punjab Civil Services Rules, Rule 6.17 (Haryana) – Family pension – Karewa marriage – Family pension will be continued to the widow or widower till the death or the re-marriage, whichever occur earlier – Karewa marriage by petitioner/ widow – Petitioner not entitled for family pension.

(Para 3-5, 11-15)

Service matter -- Recovery from employee -- Opportunity of hearing -- Order imposes an employee with the penal consequence, such as recovery can only be done after giving due opportunity of hearing to the employee concerned -- No show cause notice was given before effecting the recovery, which act itself renders the recovery illegal even if the same has been done on the basis of undertaking -- Impugned orders of recovery set aside.

(Para 12-15)

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Increase in age of retirement/ discharge of Anganwari workers/ helpers – Writ of mandamus – By impugned order High Court held them entitled to be continued in their engagement until attaining the age of 65 years against the existing policy of the appellant-State of discharging them upon attaining the age of 60 years – Held, existing statutory norms do not provide for uniform age limit for retirement of AWs/AHs; and it is for the State Government to decide as regards the service conditions, including the age of discharge -- No mandamus could have been issued so as to thrust a particular age of discharge -- Appeal allowed, impugned orders passed by High Court set aside.

(Para 11-13)

A. Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Recovery after retirement -- ACP benefits given on the basis of Government instructions – Thereafter Government withdrew the benefits -- Held, amount recovered from the retiral benefits of the petitioner is not in accordance with law – Amount ordered to be refunded with 6% interest per annum.

(Para 6, 7)

B. Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Delay in retiral benefits -- Petitioner shall be entitled for interest on that delay -- 6% per annum interest awarded from the date of retirement of the petitioner till the date of its disbursal.

(Para 6, 7)

Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume-II, Rule 6.17 – Family pension -- First wife died on 08.09.2006, thereafter, the husband married the petitioner -- Husband died on 11.10.2015 – Not the case of either of the parties that the son of earlier wife was minor at time of death of husband -- 50% of the pension was sanctioned and denied full pension by invoking Note-1 of Rule 6.17 (4) of Punjab Civil Services Rules which is not applicable -- Petition allowed with cost of Rs.10,000/-, petitioner held entitled for the grant of full pension/ 100% family pension w.e.f. the date of death of the husband alongwith arrears of family pension -- Arrears of pension shall carry an interest @ 6 % per annum (simple).

(Para 7-11)

Constitution of India, Article 300A -- Withholding of pensionary benefits – Pendency of complaints – Ground of -- Pension and pensionary benefits are Constitutional Rights and they can be withheld or deprived of only by the authority of law -- There was neither any judicial or criminal or disciplinary proceedings or any other statutory proceedings against the petitioner -- Mere pendency of some complaints against the petitioner cannot become a ground for deferment of pension and pensionary benefits -- Petition allowed, petitioner held entitled for benefits alongwith interest @ 6% per annum, in case amount not paid within four months, future rate of interest @ 9% per annum allowed instead of 6% -- Petitioner was earlier compelled to file a writ petition, held entitled for costs of Rs.25,000/-.

(Para 9)

A. Constitution of India, Article 309 – Civil Servant -- Whenever a dispute relating to a service matter, which includes a claim for allowances, is raised before the Administrative Tribunal, the primary duty of the Tribunal is to see what is provided by the relevant Act issued under the main part of Article 309 or the Rules issued under the Proviso to Article 309.

(Para 20)

B. Service law -- Employment – Nature of – Adjudication upon -- There are three different categories of employment;

(i) employment which is statutorily protected under labour welfare legislations, so as to prevent exploitation and unfair labour practices;

(ii) employment which falls outside the purview of the labour welfare legislations and hence, governed solely by the terms of the contract; and

(iii) employment of persons to civil posts or in the civil services of the Union or the State.

Any Court or Tribunal adjudicating a dispute relating to conditions of service of an employee, should keep in mind the different parameters applicable to these three different categories of employment.

(Para 23)

C. Constitution of India, Article 309 – Factories Act, 1948 (63 of 1948), Section 48 -- Service Rules – Civil Servant – Claim for overtime -- Unlike those employed in factories and industrial establishments, persons in public service who are holders of civil posts or in the civil services of the Union or the State are required to place themselves at the disposal of the Government all the time – In the light of the Rules, there was actually no scope for the respondents to seek payment of Double Over Time Allowance -- No benefit can be claimed by anyone dehors the statutory rules – No benefits of the provisions of Chapter VI of the 1948 Act can be claimed dehors the service rules.

(Para 24-34)

Service matter – Regular pay scale – Right of -- Petitioner was appointed as Hostel Warden in Law College on 13.10.2005, which then became the constituent institution of the University -- Thereafter, the petitioner was brought in the regular cadre of the respondent University w.e.f. 27.02.2009 as Hostel Supervisor on consolidated salary – Petitioner acquired qualification for the post i.e. graduation in May, 2010 – Regular Pay Scale was granted to her w.e.f. 15.6.2012 -- At the time of acquiring the essential qualifications, there was no vacancy -- After the creation of additional posts, the petitioners have been regularised and are being paid regular salary -- Consequently, they cannot claim regular salary from the date they acquired qualification, as on that date there was no vacancy.

(Para 2, 11)

A. Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of the Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2003, Rule 7(c) -- Ex gratia appointment -- Petitioner No.2/ son of deceased employee was placed in the waiting list for appointment, however, could not be offered appointment as only 5% quota of the sanctioned posts according to seniority were to be filled up and the petitioner was below in seniority list – List, which was valid only for a period of three years, expired before the turn of petitioner No.2 could come as per his seniority -- Therefore, no illegality has been committed by the respondent State in declining ex gratia appointment to petitioner No.2.

(Para 8, 9)

B. Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of the Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2003, Rule 7(c) -- Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2006 -- Ex gratia appointment -- Ex-gratia financial assistance -- Employee died on 02.10.2003 while in service and at the relevant time, Rules of 2003 were in existence – Ex-gratia appointment was declined on 29.08.2007 – Option to opt for Ex-gratia financial assistance was not sought from the dependents of the deceased Government employee -- Writ petition allowed, petitioner No.1 to submit her option within a period of one month so as to seek ex-gratia financial assistance in terms of Rules of 2006 -- On receipt of such option, the respondents shall take final decision for payment of ex-gratia financial assistance to the petitioners within one month thereafter.

(Para 10,11)

Constitution of  India, Article 226 – Writ of mandamus -- Service matter -- Contractual employment – Renewal of contract – Right of -- Petitioner engaged for a specific term under an agreement and its term has expired -- As such the petitioner ceases to be in the employment of the respondents, who have taken a conscious decision, not to renew the contract -- At this stage, the respondents can neither be forced to reinstate the petitioner nor to renew the agreement.

(Para 9)

Constitution of India, Article 311 -- Dismissal of judicial officer -- A judicial officer cannot pronounce the concluding portion of his judgment in open court without the entire text of the judgment being prepared/dictated -- Respondent in the departmental enquiry just pass on the responsibility to the inefficient and allegedly novice stenographer – Not preparing/dictating judgments, but providing a fait accompli, is completely unacceptable and unbecoming of a judicial officer – Penalty of dismissal from service imposed.

(Para 1, 12-24)