LexB.S. BAJWA AND ANR. versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
-
B.S. BAJWA AND ANR.
A
v.
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.
DECEMBER 11, 1997
(A.M. AHMADI, CJ., B.N. KIRPAL AND V.N. KHARE, JJ.]
B
Constitution of India, 1950 : Article 226.
Writ-Lache~~Dismissal for.
c
Service law-Se11i01ity-Gaim for senio1ity after inordinate delay-Per-
missibility of-Appelfants granted Short Service Commission in Anny-On
being released from Anny they joined P. W.D. (B & R)-Dwing a period of
more than a decade they were shown junior to other persons-Promotion also
made in the meantime-No document produced to show that they ever
objected to their position in the gradation list-W!it filed after a decade D
claiming se11i01ity--Held in service matters the question of seniority should
not be re-opened after the lapse of a reasonable period because that results
in disturbing the settled position which is not justifiable-T7iere was inordinate
delay in the present case for making such a giievance-This alone was
sufficient to decline interference under A1ticle 226 and to reject the w1it
petition-Constitution of lndia-Articie 226.
Practice and Procedure-Concession made by Counsel-Effect of-Ap-
peal involving se11i01ity dispute-Advocate General appeming for State-Con-
cession made by him 011 point of law-Held not binding on State or anyone
else adversely affected thereby.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 7605-
7610 of 1996.
E
F
From the Judgment and Order dated 21.12.1994 of the Punjab and
Haryana High Court in L.P.A. Nos. 424, 425 & 483 of 1986 and C.W.P. G
Nos. 4958, 5777 of 1985 and 2922 of 1986.
Appellant-in-person, T.N. Singh for the Appellants.
V.C. Mahajan and M.L. Varma, R.D. Bawa, P.N. Puri, S.S. Sodhi,
Ms. Madhu Moolchandani and Ms. B.K. Brar, Advocates with them for H
451
452
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997) SUPP. 6 S.C.R.
A the Respondents.
B
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
Delay condoned. Leave granted in SLP Nos. 23599-23600/97 {CC
Nos. 8677-8678/97).
CA. 7605-7610/96
These appeals by special leave are against the Judgment dated 21st
December, 1994 of the Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal arising out
C of the judgment dated 2:5.4.1986 of the Single Judge in Civil Writ Petition
No. 772of1984 which was filed in the High Court by B.S. Bajwa and B.D.
Gupta. The grievance made by them was, in substance, with regard to their
seniority and placement in the gradation list of the department.
The material facts in brief are this. Both B.S. Bajwa and B.D. Gupta
D joined the Army and were granted Short Service Commission on 30th
March, 1963 and 30th October, 1963 respectively when they were students
in the final year of the Engineering Degree Course. B.S. Bajwa graduated
thereafter in June, 1963 and B.D. Gupta graduated in 1964. On being
released from the Army B.S. Bajwa joined the PWD (B&R) on 4.5.1971
E and B.D. Gupta joined. the same department on 12th May, 1972. There
position in the gradation list was shown throughout with reference to these
dates of joining the department. It is sufficient to state that throughout their
career as Assistant Engineer, Executive Engineer and Superintending
Engineer both B.S. Bajwa and B.D. Gupta were shown as juniors to B.L.
F
Bansal, Nirmal Singh, G.R. Chaudhary, D.P. Bajaj and Jagir Singh. It is
also undisputed that B.L. Bansal, Nirmal Singh, G.R. Chaudhary, D.P.
Bajaj and J agir Singh got their promotions as Executive Engineer select
grade and promotion as Superintending Engineer prior to B.S. Bajwa and
B.D. Gupta. It is obvious that the grievance, if any, of B.S. Bajwa and B.D.
Gupta to their placement below B.L. Bansal, Nirmal Singh, G.R.
G Chaudhary, D.P. Bajaj and Jagir Singh should have been from the very
inception of their cam:r in the department, i.e. from 1971-72. Howevet, it
was only in the year 1984 that B.S. Bajwa and B.D. Gupta filed the
aforesaid writ petition in the High Court claiming a much earlier date of
appointment in the department. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ
H petition which led to Letter Patent Appeal No. 424/86 being filed by B.L.
-
B.S. BAJWAv. STATE
453
Bansal, Nirmal Singh, G.R. Chaudhary, D.P. Bajaj and Jagir Singh befor~ A
a Division Bench of the High Court.
By the impugned judgment the Letters Patent Appeal is said to have
been allowed but in fact it amounts to dismissal of that LPA inasmuch as
B
it granted certain benefits to S.S. Bajwa and B.D. Gupta which has the
effect of making B.S. Bajwa and B.D. Gupta senior to tExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.