RSA No. 244 State of Haryana and others Madan Lal CORAM: Present:- HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) by the defendants First Appellate Court thereby modifying the passed by the learned trial Court convenience, the parties are being referred to as per their status in the Civil Suit. 2. judgment and decree dated District Judge, Court”), whereby an appeal preferred by the appellant against the judgment and decree dated Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), RSA No.572-2021 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH State of Haryana and others Vs. Madan Lal CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA - Mr.R.P.S. Brar, AAG, Haryana. for the appellants. Mr. Rakesh Nagpal, Advocate for the respondent. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) The appellants-defendants are in appeal. First appeal filed by the defendants-State of Haryana was partly accepted by the learned First Appellate Court thereby modifying the passed by the learned trial Court to a limited extent convenience, the parties are being referred to as per their status in the Civil Suit. By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment and decree dated 20.11.2019 District Judge, Sirsa (hereinafter to be referred as ), whereby an appeal preferred by the appellant against the judgment and decree dated Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.572-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision: 02.07.2026 …..Appellants …..Respondent HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA R.P.S. Brar, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Rakesh Nagpal, Advocate defendants are in appeal. First appeal filed State of Haryana was partly accepted by the learned First Appellate Court thereby modifying the judgment and decree to a limited extent. For the sake of convenience, the parties are being referred to as per their status in the By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the 20.11.2019 passed by the Court of learned (hereinafter to be referred as “First Appellate ), whereby an appeal preferred by the appellants-defendants against the judgment and decree dated 07.01.2019 passed by the Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sirsa (hereinafter to be 2026 defendants are in appeal. First appeal filed State of Haryana was partly accepted by the learned judgment and decree sake of convenience, the parties are being referred to as per their status in the By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the passed by the Court of learned “First Appellate defendants passed by the (hereinafter to be SANJAY GUPTA 2026.07.06 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA No.572-2021 (O&M) referred as “trial Court”), decreeing the suit for recovery was partly allowed; thereby modifying the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court. 3. Briefly stating, the respondent-plaintiff was appointed as Beldar on work-charge basis and was subsequently converted to the post of Peon vide order of the Superintending Engineer, R&D Circle, Hisar, No. 53-94/5-E dated 19.05.1984 however, his services were terminated vide order dated 19.06.1985. The plaintiff challenged the said termination order by filing a Civil Suit which was dismissed and the subsequent first appeal was also dismissed. This Court allowed the Regular Second Appeal No.711 of 1990, thereby reinstating the plaintiff to the post of Peon on 19.01.2001, subject to the condition that he would not be entitled to salary for the period he remained out of service; however, he was held entitled to notional benefits, such as fixation of pay from the original date of appointment. The grievance of the plaintiff is that he was not extended the benefit of such notional fixation and was, instead, treated as a fresh entrant into service with effect from 20.01.2001. Aggrieved thereby, the plaintiff filed a representation for notional fixation of pay before defendant No. 2, followed by a further representation seeking actual fixation of pay, which was accepted vide order dated 24.01.2017, whereby he was granted the benefit of notional pay as well as actual fixation of pay. However, the benefit of two annual increments to which he was entitled, falling due on SANJAY GUPTA 2026.07.06 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA No.572-2021 (O&M) 01.07.2015 and 01.07.2016 were not granted to him on the grounds that he had not passed the typing test. In the interregnum, the plaintiff was promoted to the post of Clerk on 20.08.2014. The grievance of the plaintiff is that he is entitled to benefit of the two aforesaid annual increments and still not been awarded the salary which he ought to have been awarded due to which his pension and other benefits have also suffered. Hence, the present suit. 4. Upon notice, defendants No.1 to 3 filed joint written statement while taking preliminary objections of non-fulfilment of conditions, maintainability, cause of action, false pleadings and concealment of facts. Besides this, it was averred by the defendants that there is a prescribed eligibility condition for promotion from Peon to Clerk, requiring the employee to qualify a typing test in Hindi and English within one year of such promotion. Since the plaintiff failed to fulfil the requisite condition of passing of typing test in Hindi and English till his retirement, therefore, the benefit of annual increments were not granted to the plaintiff. 5. From the pleadings of the parties following issues were framed:- “1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for a decree of declaration along with consequential relief of mandatory injunction, on the grounds mentioned in the plaint? OPP 2. Whether the suit is not maintainable in the present form? OPD. 3. Relief.” SANJAY GUPTA 2026.07.06 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA No.572-2021 (O&M) 6. The learned trial Court, vide its judgment and decree dated 07.01.2019, decreed the suit while holding that the plaintiff was held entitled to both the annual increments w.e.f. 01.07.2015 and 01.07.2016 with consequential revision/ fixation of pay, pension and other service benefits. The plaintiff was also held entitled for arrears along with interest @ 12% per annum from the due dates till actual realization. The relevant paragraph No.20 of the judgment and decree dated 07.01.2019 is reproduced hereunder:- “20. In view of the above discussion, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed with costs. A decree of Declaration is hereby passed to the effect that Plaintiff is entitled to both the annual increments w.e.f. 01.07.2015 and 01.07.2016 and consequential revision/fixation of his pay, pension and other service benefits and he is also entitled to receive the arrears along-with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the due dates till actual realization. Further, the consequential relief of Mandatory Injunction is also granted to plaintiff, thereby directing the defendants to release to the plaintiff the arrears of pay, pension, etc. after revision/fixation of his pay in terms of the aforesaid declaration alongwith simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum from due dates till realization. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.” 7. Aggrieved thereof, the appellants-defendants filed the first appeal, which came to be partly accepted vide judgment and decree dated 20.11.2019 by the learned First Appellate Court while reducing the interest from 12% to 9% per annum only. Hence, the present SANJAY GUPTA 2026.07.06 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA No.572-2021 (O&M) appeal. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the appellants and having gone through the paper-book / records, I am unable to find substance in the submission(s) made on behalf of the appellants-defendants. 9. A perusal of the record shows that against the judgment and decree dated 07.01.2019 passed by the learned trial Court passed in favour of the plaintiff, first appeal was filed at the instance of appellants/defendants. Therein, the only challenge raised was with respect to the rate of interest awarded, @ 12% per annum, and not to the underlying finding regarding the plaintiff's entitlement to the two annual increments or the consequential fixation of pay, pension and other service benefits flowing therefrom. The correctness of the finding that the plaintiff was entitled to the increments falling due on 01.07.2015 and 01.07.2016, therefore, attained finality between the parties and was never put in issue before the First Appellate Court. 10. Accordingly, once the learned First Appellate Court vide judgment and decree dated 20.11.2019 awarded interest @ 9% per annum in favour of the plaintiff instead of 12% per annum as granted by the learned trial Court on the annual increments awarded in favour of respondent/plaintiff w.e.f. 01.07.2015 and 01.07.2016, followed by consequential revision/re-fixation of pay, pension and other service benefits, no illegality or perversity could be found with the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Courts below, and there being no misreading or misinterpretation of either the pleadings or the evidence SANJAY GUPTA 2026.07.06 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA No.572-2021 (O&M) available on record, the present appeal, being devoid of merits, is hereby dismissed. 11. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 02.07.2026 (HARKESH MANUJA) sanjay JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Whether Reportable? Yes/No SANJAY GUPTA 2026.07.06 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document