Two decades on, HC upholds withdrawal of extra increment

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, December 10

Benevolence shown by a managing director of Punjab State Seeds Corporation Limited more than two decades ago on the eve of his retirement has failed to find favour with the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Terming the grant of advance increments to the employees as whimsical, Justice Jitendra Chauhan of the High Court has refused to quash the order withdrawing the same.

The order came on a petition filed in 1998 by Harjinder Singh against Punjab State Seeds Corporation Limited. He was seeking directions for quashing impugned orders issued in September 1998 whereby the advance increments were withdrawn.

The solitary submission raised by his counsel was that advance increments were granted under the rule and bylaws of the respondent corporation and there was no provision to review order granting the same.

The senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents argued that the then managing director first rejected the grant of increments to the petitioner in December 1995, and, thereafter, granted 2+1 increment with effect from January 31, 1996, the date on which he was to retire from service.

Justice Chauhan asserted that the bylaws made it clear that the grant of any such benefit was to be in recognition of exceptionally good services of an employee. In the instant case, there was no reference to exceptionally good service rendered by the petitioner in the orders granting increments. The petitioner, too, had not referred to any such achievements.

“It has also come on record that 15 employees, who were appointed in January 1996, were also given an additional increment by the then managing director after initial rejection on December 20, 1995. They were ultimately granted it with effect from January 31, 1996. Thus, the order dated January 31, 1996, emerges as a whimsical order in favour of the petitioner and other employees by the then managing director on the eve of his retirement,” he added.

He said the action of the respondents in withdrawing the advance increments by passing speaking orders could not be said to be illegal and the same was upheld.