1.9.1981 at the stage of Rs.850/ in the pay scale of Rs.620 20 700/25 850/30 1000/40 1200 and his pay was raised from Rs.850/ to Rs.880/ per month.
The Respondent State even granted one additional increment w.e.f.
24.9.1972 vide office order No.
with interest at 18 per annum.
100 dated 24.3.1995 was passed by the Superintending Engineer, Central Works Circle, PWD allowing the Appellant to cross the efficiency bar w.e.f.
The Civil Revision Petition filed by the State against the order dated 15.5.1996 of the Executing Court was allowed holding that the Appellant is entitled to an amount of Rs.60,586.75 from 9.12.1992, namely, the date of decree upto the date of actual payment.
The Executing Court dismissed the objections filed by the Respondent State and held that the Appellant is entitled for interest at 12 per annum with yearly rest.
Both the learned companynsel argued the case at length.
The Appellant was held to be entitled for companysideration of crossing the efficiency bar.
A criminal case was initiated against the Appellant which ultimately resulted in the acquittal of the Appellant vide judgment and order dated 9.8.1973 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar.
Two second appeals which were filed by the Respondent against the companymon judgment of the Appellate Court were dismissed by the High Court on 12.9.1994.
1527 1528 of 1995 in this Court and the same was dismissed vide order dated 3.2.1995.
An appeal was filed by the Appellant which was allowed by the First Appellate Court vide judgment dated 17.11.1993 and the appeal filed by the Respondent State was dismissed.
The appellant joined the PWD Department of State of Punjab as Clerk on 2.2.1953.
1.1.1986 raising his pay from Rs.2100/ to Rs.2150/ per month vide their office order No.
The Appellant was reinstated vide order dated 12.4.1978 and it was ordered that period of his suspension be treated on duty for all intents and purposes.
57/E dated 24.5.1965.
898 of 14.5.1990 for declaration and mandatory injunction seeking full pay and allowances for the period 25.5.1965 to 28.4.1978 and also claimed that he was entitled to cross efficiency bar w.e.f.
Thereafter the Appellant filed execution petition in the Court of Additional Civil Judge, Amritsar on 31.10.1994.
The Respondent State filed its objections.
The Respondent State thereupon filed Special Leave Petition Nos.
He was promoted as a Sub Divisional Clerk in the year 1957 and thereafter as Accounts Clerk in April 1965.
100 dated 24.3.1995 was issued by the Respondent whereby the Appellant was allowed to cross the efficiency bar.
55/E dated 27.4.1978.
Office Order No.
103/95 dated 30.3.1995, the Appellant was also granted one additional increment on companysolidation of 8 years service in the form of proficiency step up w.e.f.
No departmental action was taken against the Appellant and he was merely kept under suspension.
The Appellant filed Suit No.
1.9.1981 and companysequential relief thereof i.e. proficiency step up increments, increase in leave encashment, pension and gratuity etc.
The Appellant replied to the objections of the State in the execution proceedings.
The Appellant was given proforma promotion as Officiating Head Clerk w.e.f.
The Appellant retired after attaining the age of superannuation as Superintendent Grade IV on 28.2.1989.
The suit of the Appellant was partly allowed by the trial companyrt holding him entitled for an amount of Rs.60,586.75 along with interest at 12 per annum from the date the amount became due till its actual payment.
103 dated 30.3.1995.
Arising out of SLP C No.
1.1.1986.
A case of embezzlement and misappropriation of Government funds was made against him and the department filed an appeal against the Respondent and he was put under suspension vide office order No.
20477 of 2005 Dr. AR.
But the High Court vide order dated 8.4.2005 allowed the Civil Revision filed by the Respondent setting aside the order dated 15.5.1996 passed by the Executing Court.
The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 8.4.2005 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Civil Revision No.
The claim for crossing the efficiency bar was, however, rejected by the Trial Court being time barred.
2569 of 1996 whereby the High Court allowed the Civil Revision filed by the respondent State of Punjab.
LAKSHMANAN, J. Leave granted.
The Appellant sought mandatory injunction for payment of the aforementioned dues with interest.
