Baldev Krishan vs H.P.S.E.B Ltd

Vivek Singh Thakur, J

Petitioner has approached this Court seeking direction to respondents to pay consequential benefits of appointment/promotion of the petitioner as T­mate, Assistant Lineman and Lineman w.e.f 6.2.1992, 29.3.2012 and 12.10.2017, respectively by paying arrears of monetary benefits accruing thereon.

Admittedly, facts in present case are that petitioner was engaged as a daily waged worker by respondents w.e.f 14.4.1980, however, petitioner’s name was left out and was not included in the seniority list of daily workman but the said mistake was rectified by the respondents vide communication dated 13.8.1993 (Annexure P­1) sent from Secretary H.P. State Electricity Board to Chief Engineer (OP), South, Shimla directing to insert name of petitioner between serial No. 8 Shyam Lal and Sr. No.9 Pritam Singh on the basis of his date of engagement as 14.4.1980. In pursuance to the said letter, name of petitioner was inserted in the list at serial No. 8(a) as is evident from Annexure P­2. Thereafter, petitioner was appointed as a T­mate vide office order dated 24.8.1993 and his name was reflected in the revised provisional seniority list of T­mate at serial No.69 but with date of joining as 26.8.1993, whereas his junior Pritam Singh was shown to have been appointed as T­mate on 6.2.1992.

On rectification of a mistake vide communication dated 13.8.1993, petitioner was ordered to be inserted in the list above Pritam Singh as Pritam singh was appointed on 1.10.1980 whereas petitioner was appointed on 14.4.1980 and, therefore, he was to be appointed as T­mate either prior to or alongwith Pritam Singh and, thus, was entitled for appointment as T­mate atleast w.e.f 6.2.1992.

For reflection of wrong date of appointment of the petitioner as T­mate, his further promotion as Assistant Lineman and Lineman was also reflected from a wrong date which was later than his entitlement for his promotion.

Being aggrieved by mistake of the department, petitioner approached Erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal by filing OA No. 1860 of 2017. On abolition of Erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal, it was transferred to this High Court and was registered as CWPOA No. 1893 of 2020.

During pendency of the aforesaid petition, respondents rectified their mistake with respect to date of appointment of petitioner as T­mate as well as date of promotion as Assistant Lineman and Lineman by issuing office corrigendum dated 16.11.2017 and office order 3.11.2017 and 20.12.2017 respectively (Annexure P­7, P­8 and P­9). Though date of appointment/promotion was corrected by the respondents but it was done on notional basis without any financial benefits. Therefore, above referred CWPOA No. 1893 of 2020 was withdrawn by the counsel for the petitioner, in view of intervening developments, with liberty to file afresh. As such, resultantly, present petition has been preferred by the petitioner for grant of monetary benefits alongwith arrears thereof.

To oppose the prayer of the petitioner stand taken by the respondents is that petitioner did not work on respective post of T­mate Assistant Lineman and Lineman from the corrected dates of his appointment/promotion and, therefore, he is not entitled for actual monetary benefits and arrears thereof from such dates on account of rectification of seniority list as well as his dates of appointment and promotions by the respondents.

The petitioner was engaged as a daily waged worker in the lowest rank of the respondents having no control over the administrative, ministerial and documentation work of the respondents. It is duty of the respondents to maintain proper record and to prepare correct seniority list and to confer status of work charge, making appointment and promotion of its employees as per their entitlement on the basis of correct particulars and dates. But in present case respondents have failed to perform their duty. Though mistake was noticed and rectified by the respondents in the year 1993 during pendency of previous round of litigation and seniority list of daily wager was corrected by placing the name of petitioner at appropriate place, however, respondents failed to confer the benefits of such correction to the petitioner rather they continued to act causing adverse impact on the rights and entitlement of the petitioner constraining the petitioner to prefer present petition.

There is no fault on the part of the petitioner in the entire episode rather he has suffered for mistake of his employer. Petitioner was never unwilling to work as T­mate Assistant Lineman or Lineman from the due date as per his entitlement rather it is a case of the petitioner that he actually worked as such despite the fact that in papers his appointment and promotion were reflected from a later date.

Be that as it may, petitioner was willing to work on the respective post but was kept away by authorities for no fault on his part, therefore, it is not a case where petitioner remained away from the work for his own reasons despite offer to him for performing the work but he was refrained on account of act of the employer. Therefore, as also, held by the Supreme Court in Union of India vs. K.V JankiRaman case reported in (1991) 4 SCC 109, principle of ‘no work no pay’ is not applicable and provisions of FR 17 (1) will also be inapplicable in present case. Therefore, petitioner is held entitled for consequential financial/ monetary benefits on account of his appointment as T­mate, promotions as Assistant Lineman and Lineman w.e.f 6.2.1992, 29.3.2012 and 12.10.2017, respectively.

Accordingly, condition of appointment/promotion on notional basis in corrigendum dated 16.11.2017, 3.11.2017, 20.12.2017 (Annexure P­7 to P­9) restricting the monetary benefits on notional basis is quashed and set­aside. Rest portion of aforesaid corrigendum and office orders, is not interfered with further direction that actual financial/monetary which are consequential benefits be extended to the petitioner and after calculating, the same be released to him on or before 30.9.2022.

Petition is allowed and disposed of in aforesaid terms.