Suraj Parkash v. Uttar Haryana Bijali Vitran Nigam Ltd And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 21.04.2026 Suraj Parkash ....Petitioner

Versus

Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present:

Mr. Mohnish Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. R.K. Chaudhary, Advocate for Mr. Sukhdeep S. Parmar, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 4.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, claiming the following reliefs:- (i) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction by this Hon'ble Court directing the respondents to grant the petitioner the deemed date of regular promotion to the post of Executive Engineer (XEN) with effect from 21.04.2018, which was granted to respondent Virender Singh (junior to the petitioner) vide Office Order No. 26/UHBV/HR-II EG-137/Vol-II dated 29.01.2026 (Annexure P-8) along with all consequential service and retiral benefits, including revision of pension/pensionary benefits at the level of regular XEN as

per Level-13 of the 7th Pay Commission along with market rate of interest on delayed payments;

(ii) Further directing the respondents to grant petitioner regular pay scale, salary of the post of Junior Engineer-I, Assistant Executive Engineer, Assistant Engineer, when the petitioner was made to discharge the official duties on the post of JE-I, Assistant Executive Engineer and Assistant Engineer on the basis of current duty charge (CDC) inspite of the fact that regular, vacant sanctioned post of JE-I, Assistant Executive Engineer, Assistant Engineer duly available at that point of time in UHBVNL.

(iii) Further directing the Respondents consider and decide the Petitioner's representations dated 09.03.2023 (P-6), 06.07.2023 (P-7) and 23.03.2026 (P-9) given by the petitioner to the respondents for grant of service benefits for which the petitioner is entitled in a time bound manner; (iv) To pass any other further writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, and in the interest of justice.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, submits that the issue involved in the present petition is no longer res integra. He relies upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smt. P. Grover v. State of Haryana, 1983 AIR SC 1060 and Arindam Chattopadhyay and others v. State of West Bengal and others, Civil Appeal No.25021 of 2013, and submit that an employee working on a higher post cannot be denied the salary attached thereto. He further submits that the petitioner submitted multiple representations dated 09.03.2023 (Annexure P-6), 06.07.2023 (Annexure P-7) and 23.03.2026

(Annexure P-9), however, no decision has been taken so far. Lastly, he submits that he would be satisfied if the instant writ petition of the petitioner is treated as a comprehensive representation and the same be decided by respondent No.1 by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner.

3.

Learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 4, appearing on advance notice, submits that he has no objection, in case a direction is issued to respondent No.1 for time-bound consideration and decision thereof by passing a speaking order.

4.

Therefore, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondent No.1 is directed to treat this writ petition as a comprehensive representation and consider the case of the petitioner and pass a speaking order in the light of the authoritative pronouncement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in P. Grover's case (supra), after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of 03 months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioner. Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted forthwith by respondent No.1. 5.

Disposed of, accordingly.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 21.04.2026 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No