HARBANS SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

HARBANS SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

Since there was no technical/non-technical dichotomy under the Rules in 1977, the Government was right in reconsidering the eligibility and granting promotion to the appellant as Legal Assistant with consequential benefits from May 20, 1977.

Parties
Appellant: Harbans Singh; Respondent: State of Punjab and Ors.; Third Respondent: Ajit Lal Arora
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
03 August 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Promotion, Seniority, Dichotomy of Technical and Non Technical Posts
Service Law Promotion Seniority Dichotomy of Technical and Non Technical Posts

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harbans Singh

Appellant

State of Punjab and Ors.

Respondent

Ajit Lal Arora

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was entitled to be considered for promotion as on May 20, 1977 under the unamended Punjab Law and Legislative Department Provincial Service Class III Rules, 1951.

Ratio Decidendi

Since there was no technical/non-technical dichotomy under the Rules in 1977, the Government was right in reconsidering the eligibility and granting promotion to the appellant as Legal Assistant with consequential benefits from May 20, 1977.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Government directed to create supernumerary post of Deputy Legal Remembrancer till third respondent retires or till date he was promoted as Deputy Legal Remembrancer.
  • Appellant deemed to be promoted as Legal Assistant w.e.f. May 20, 1977 and entitled to all consequential benefits.