IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT 571 Dharam Paul State of Punjab CORAM: HON Present : AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1. dated 23.07.2002, Annexure P 32 years proficiency step petitioner. 2. objections of Headquarters, Punjab Home Guards, dated 21.01.2024, which read thus: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Dharam Paul Versus f Punjab and Others CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY None for the petitioner. Mr. Arun Gupta, DAG, Punjab. AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) Prayer made in the present petition is for quashing the order dated 23.07.2002, Annexure P-5, and ordering the grant of 24 years and 32 years proficiency step-up and one promotion under ACP Scheme to the Learned State counsel refers to par objections of written statement by the Junior State Officer (Admn) State Headquarters, Punjab Home Guards, dated 21.01.2024, which read thus: “1. That the present Civil writ Petition is n since the case of the petitioner has already been considered by Respondent No.2, as annexed with the petition as Annexure P-5, under Punjab Govt. 23.9.98. As per para 1 (b) of Punjab Govt. instructions dated 1-9-89, Annexure RI for Proficiency increment(s) only if he has not gained any enhancement in his basic pay, increments and fixation of pay as a result of revision of pay scales from time to time." Thus, in case the pay in the senior scale/selection grade is where-by one gets the benefit of one or more increment (s) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-9814-2003 (O & M) Date of decision: 26.03.2025 ....Petitioner ...Respondents BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY AG, Punjab. Prayer made in the present petition is for quashing the order 5, and ordering the grant of 24 years and up and one promotion under ACP Scheme to the Learned State counsel refers to paras 1 and 2 of preliminary written statement by the Junior State Officer (Admn) State Headquarters, Punjab Home Guards, dated 21.01.2024, which read thus: hat the present Civil writ Petition is not maintainable ioner has already been considered by Respondent No.2, as annexed with the petition as 5, under Punjab Govt. instructions dated b) of Punjab Govt. instructions 89, Annexure RI “an employee will be eligible increment(s) only if he has not gained any enhancement in his basic pay, except by way of annual increments and fixation of pay as a result of revision of pay scales from time to time." Thus, in case the pay in the senior scale/selection grade is fixed at the minimum, by one gets the benefit of one or more increment (s) PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.03.26 18:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CWP-9814-2003 -2- the service rendered against the post prior to the date of such fixation of pay will not be counted for the purpose of grant of Proficiency step-up (s). However, the period of eight or eighteen years service will further be reckoned for the purpose of grant of Proficiency step-up (s) from the start of placement in the senior scale/selection grade. As the petitioner was granted higher pay scale of Junior Assistant with effect from 1.1.86 and have received monetary benefit equal to two increments at the time of grant of aforesaid higher pay scale, the 24 years Proficiency step up was net due to him. He having not completed 24 years service as Junior Assistant with effect from 1.1.86, therefore, his claim for 24 years Proficiency step up does not arise. 2. The present writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has net challenged the instructions dated 1.9.69, 10.3.97, & 25.9.98 Annexures R-I & P-I & P-II on the basis of which the case of the petitioner has been rejected.’ 3. Disposed of, reserving the petitioner with a liberty to get it revived, in case need arises. 26.03.2025 (AMAN CHAUDHARY) parveen kumar JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.03.26 18:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.