JUDGMENT 1. - In this Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner Union has prayed for issuance of a writ, order or direction to quash the decision of the Government contained in the Circular dated 2th June, 1988 and to declare that the retirement brought about in pursuance of the said Circular dated 29th June, 1988, be declared null and void and all the employees retired, by different orders, on or about 29th tune, 1988, may be declared void and a direction be issued for re-instatement of all such employees with consequential benefits. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner Union is a body registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926. It represents 295 members, employed in different categories in Public Works Department in Alwar. In the writ petition, the Union has raised a grievance on behalf of about 40 employees belonging to Class IV category who are sought to be retired at the age of 58 years notwithstanding the fact that the age of retirement of Class IV employees as prescribed in the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 is 60 years with effect from 1st Sept. 1984. The petitioner Union has contended that it has been the practice throughout the State of Rajasthan that the Public Works Department and other Engineering Department have been engaging persons on work charged establishment. The work charged employees, thus, do not receive the benefits as are received by their counter-parts on the regular establishment. The matter was agitated by the Union and a policy decision was taken by the Government in the year 1971, to bring those employees of work-charged establishment to regular establishment who had rendered 10 years' service or more. It is pleaded by the petitioner Union that the policy decision is contained in the letter dated, 15th Feb, 1971, which had been issued by the Secetary to the Government Public Works Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur and addressed to the Chief Engineer, Public Works Deptt., B and R. Rajasthan, Jaipur. Through this decision, the Government has converted the work-charged posts in the Public Works Department, B and R, including Gardeners, into permanent regular posts. Through this decision, the Government has converted the work-charged posts in the Public Works Department, B and R, including Gardeners, into permanent regular posts. It is further submitted that the said order was substituted by another order dated 25th Feb., 1972 vide which it was decided that all work-charged employees who have completed 10 years continuous service on 1st March, 1970, shall be taken on regular cadre with effect from 1st January, 1971, and they will be governed by the rules applicable to regular Government employees, as amended from time to time. It was also directed that the permanent work- charged employees presently covered under the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme and who are taken on regular cadre shall be allowed to continue to contribute to the fund or to opt for pensionary benefits under the Rajasthan Service Rules. In the order, it was specifically mentioned that the order was issued with the concurrence of the Finance Department. The case, as disclosed by the petitioner Union with respect to its members who are employed in different categories in the Public Works Department is that the employees who are work charged employees and who have been brought on regular establishment by the aforesaid decision taken by the Government, their conditions of service would be regulated under the provisions of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 and thus the age of retirement of such employees who have been brought on regular establishment will be 60 years and their pre-mature retirement is bad in law. In order to support the stand taken by the petitioner Union, reliance has been placed by the petitioner Union on a Circular No. 7/72 dated 17th Nov., 1972. issued by the Chief Engineer, whereby it was declared that the work charged employees who had been taken on regular establishment would be governed by the provisions of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951. Reference has been made to another Circular No. 2/77 dated 10th May, 1977, wherein it is directed that the age of retirement shall be 58 years for the employees viz., Beldar, Mate, Jamadar, Gangman, Chaukidar, Bhisti, Farrash, Mali, Khalasi and Helper Gr. II included in Class IV Services. Reference has been made to another Circular No. 2/77 dated 10th May, 1977, wherein it is directed that the age of retirement shall be 58 years for the employees viz., Beldar, Mate, Jamadar, Gangman, Chaukidar, Bhisti, Farrash, Mali, Khalasi and Helper Gr. II included in Class IV Services. It may be mentioned here that prior to 1st September, 1984, the age of retirement was 58 years, but by virtue of an amendment made in the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, the age of retirement was made 60 years with effect from 1st September, 1984. The petitioner Union has further disclosed that till recently all such work-charged employees who were taken to the regular cadre of Class IV employees were being retired on attaining the age of 60 years after 1st September, 1994, but in the month of June, 1988, the persons mentioned in Schedule-A have been retired by different orders passed subsequently between 1st July (sic June) and 4th June, 1988, with effect from 30th June, 1988. It is further contended that the process of retirement would continue in Class IV employees and they would be retired at the age of 58 years in view of order dated 29th June, 1988. It is, thus, submitted by the petitioner Union that the decision of the Government in the Circular dated 29th June, 1988 is arbitrary, unreasonable and unconstitutional as the employees who have been treated on regular cadre cannot be retired at the age of 58 years. 3. The respondents have filed reply to the writ petition in which they have contended that the employees on work-charged are governed by the Rajasthan PWD and B and R, including Gardens, Irrigation, Water-works and Ayurvedic Department Work-charged Service Rules, 1964 (for short the Rules). It is submitted by the respondents that all the permanent work-charged employees or regular work-charged em, l3yees fall within the definition of Rule 2 (a) of the Rajasthan service Rules, 1951 and, therefore. It is submitted by the respondents that all the permanent work-charged employees or regular work-charged em, l3yees fall within the definition of Rule 2 (a) of the Rajasthan service Rules, 1951 and, therefore. they are governed by the said Rules and the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 are not applicable to them so far as the conditions of service are concerned Sub-rule (3) of Rule l of the Rules of 1964 which governs the service conditions of the work-charged employees, is as follows : "(3) The Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 and other service rules affecting the service conditions of the regular establishment under the Government of Rajasthan shall be applicable to the members of these work-charged establishments only to the extent indicated in these rules." 4. Sub-Rules (f) and (g) of Rule 2 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, rein as under : (f) to persons paid from contingencies. (g) to work-charged employees, that is persons who are not on regular establishment and are paid out of provision for expenditure on works, maintenance of works or state trading schemes and similar other provisions for funds, other than provisions under budget unit of approbation 'pay of Officers' and 'pay of establishment.' 5. On the basis of the aforesaid provisions, it is contended by the respondents that the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules which are applicable to the regular employees are not applicable to those regular employees who have been made regular as stated above, are not applicable to them and they are to be retired at the age of 58 years as per Rule 8 of the Rules of 1964. It is, thus, submitted that the employees mentioned in Annx. 2 to 7 have rightly been retired at the age of 58 yeas according to the Rules of 1964. The respondents have further submitted that the service conditions of the work-charged employees were different than the employees governed by the Rajasthan Service Rules as the wages of work-charged employees are always charged to the work and consequently, they cannot be treated at par with the employees governed by the Rajasthan Service Rules of 1951. The respondents have admitted that after completion of 10 years' service, the work charged employees are treated as permanent employees on regular basis; that they are still governed under the Rules of 1964 and not by the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951. 6. The respondents have admitted that after completion of 10 years' service, the work charged employees are treated as permanent employees on regular basis; that they are still governed under the Rules of 1964 and not by the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951. 6. The short question which requirs determination is, whether the work- charged employees who have been taken on regular basis or who were absorbed permanently against the regular post are to be governed by the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, or by the Rules of 1964. Shri Singhvi, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the order, dated 1-4th February, 1971 and the letter dated 15th February 1972, in which the Government had taken a decision to take on regular cadre all work-charged employees who have completed 10 years service on 31st March, 1970, with effect from 1st January, 1971, such employees are governed by the Rules applicable to regular Government employees, as amended from time to time. He has further submitted that the Circular issued by the Chief Engineer on 17th November, 1972, is quite clear in this regard, which stipulates that the work-charged employees who had been taken on regular establishment would be governed by the provisions of the Rajasthan Service Rules 1951. Shri Singhvi has also submitted that the Circular No. 2/77, dated 10th May, 1977 also leads to the same conclusion that the service conditions of the work-charged employees who had been taken on regular cadre in pursuance of Government decision dated 22nd March, 1972, would be regulated under the Rajasthan Service Rules. Shri Singhvi has also Pointed out that the work-charged employees who have become part and parcel of the regular cadre of Class IV employees were being retired on attaining the age of 60 years after 1st September, 1984 and when they were retired at the age of 58 years upto 31st August, 1974. He has also placed reliance on Annx. 9 which shows that the Administrative Department and the Department of Personnel had accepted the Labour Court's verdict in one of the reference cases decided by it, in which the same issue was involved to treat the work charged employees of Class IV post as part of Schedule IV of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 191. 9 which shows that the Administrative Department and the Department of Personnel had accepted the Labour Court's verdict in one of the reference cases decided by it, in which the same issue was involved to treat the work charged employees of Class IV post as part of Schedule IV of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 191. "thus, the submission of Shri Singhvi is that when other Class IV employees are being retired at the age of 60 years as per the provisions of Rule 50-A of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, there is no justification for retiring the persons at the age of 58 years and, the impugned decision to retire these employees at the age of 58 years, is thus illegal and without any authority of law. Controverting the submissions of Shri Singhvi, Shri Puiohit, learned Addl. Government Advocate has submitted that the orders dated 15th February, 1971 and 25tn February, 19/2 and the Circulars dated 17th November, 1972 and 10th May, 1977 are against the provisions of Rules of 1961 as well as the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 and therefore they cannot be pressed into service to help he petitioner. He submitted that even after making the work-charged employees permanent regular employees, the said work-charged employees are still governed by the rules of 1964, as the wages of the work-charged employees are charged to the work and, consequently, such employees cannot be governed by the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951. 7. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties From the record Annx. 1, it is clear that the Federation of the work-charged employees in PWD, B and R raised a demand regarding conversion of the work-charged posts into regular ones. The Government took a decision, which is contained in the letter dated 15th February, 1972 in which a direction is contained to convey a sanction of the Government for conversion of 5602 work-charged posts of various categories in PWD, B&R into regular permanent posts with effect from 1st January, 1971, out of 11,205 posts of work-charged employees enjoying semi-permanent, or permanent status, as on 31st March, 1970. It was also clearly directed in that letter that pay scales, qualifications and other service benefits of regular permanent employees of the State Government will be applicable to the work-charged employees specifically appointed to these regular posts with effect from the date of issue of the sanction for this creation It is also clear from Annx. 1 that it was issued with the concurrence of the Finance Department. Again, in the letter dated 25th February, 1972, a decision was taken by the Government that all work charged employees who had completed 10 years continuous service as on 31st March, 1970, would be taken on regular cadre with effect from 1st January, 1971 and, they would be governed by the rules applicable to a regular Government employee. To the same effect, there are two circulars : one issued by the Chief Engineer bearing No. 4/72 dated 17th November, 1972, which is specific to the point that work-charged employees who had been taken on regular establishment would be governed by the provisions of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951. Similar is the other circular No. 72/77 dated 10th May, l977, which refers to another decision dated 22nd March, 1972, taken by the State Government, wherein it was stated that such work-charged employees taken on regular cadre would be regulated under the Rajasthan Service Rues. It was specifically mentioned therein that the age of retirement for the employees i.e. Beldar, Mate, Jamadar, Gangman, Chowkidar, Khalasi and others included in Class IV Service shall he 58 years. From the facts pleaded in the writ petition, it is also clear that upto 31st August, 1984, the employee who had been taken on regular cadre of Class IV employees was retired at the age of 58 years, and those who completed the age of superannuation after 1st September, 1988, were being retired at the age of 10 years. It is also proved that the decisions taken by the Government were complied with religiose in the matter of retirement of such employees who were taken on regular cadre from the work-charged employees as per the decisions referred to above. This is further fortified by the fact that the Labour Court also took a decision in a dispute raised before it with regard to the retirement age of Shri Bhanwar Lal, carpenter of Kota in LC Case No. 4/1981, decided on 19th June, 1982. This is further fortified by the fact that the Labour Court also took a decision in a dispute raised before it with regard to the retirement age of Shri Bhanwar Lal, carpenter of Kota in LC Case No. 4/1981, decided on 19th June, 1982. The Labour Court held that the regular work charged employees of Class IV post as exist in Schedule IV of the Rajasthan Service Rules, shall be retired at the age of 58 years, which was the age of retirement of regular employees under the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 and, this contention of the Labour Court was accepted by the Administrative Department and DOP. It is also clear from the record that the Government at no stage disowned their decisions as contained in Annx. 1 dated 15th February, 1971, in letter dated 25th February, 1972 and in the other circulars referred to above. The respondents have admitted the issuance of the aforesaid letters and the Circulars. They have also admitted that the decision taken was implemented and thus it does not lie in the mouth of the respondents to contend that the decision was illegal or wrong. Even otherwise, Shri Purohit has completely failed to convince us as in what manner the decision of the Government was contrary to the aforesaid rules. The only ground raised by him is that the wages of such work-charged employees are charged to the work and, as such, they are still work-charged employees and cannot travel beyond the Rules of 1964. It it true that the wages of work-charged employees are charged to the work but the question is, whether the ages of the work-charged employees who have been taken on regular cadre have in fact been charged to the work. The answer would be No, as such a contention has not been pleaded nor proved. There is no factual basis with regard to this contention. Further the Government has taken the decision, which has been acted upon. In a dispute raised before the Labour Court, an award was made in favour of the employee, as stated above, which was accepted by the Government without any challenge. For these reasons, we do not find any merit in this contention. 8. Further the Government has taken the decision, which has been acted upon. In a dispute raised before the Labour Court, an award was made in favour of the employee, as stated above, which was accepted by the Government without any challenge. For these reasons, we do not find any merit in this contention. 8. From the decision taken by the Government, it is clear that the decision was taken as a demand was raised by the Union for taking all work- charged employees on regular cadre. Consequently, such employees who had completed 10 years service were taken on regular cadre in pursuance of the decision taken by the Govt. with a clear understanding that they will be governed by the rules applicable to the regular Govt. employees, as amended from time to time. When other Class IV employers are being retired at the age of 60 years as per provisions of Rule 56-A of the Rules of 1951, there can be no justification for retiring the employees who have been taken on regular cadre at the age of 58 years. Thus, we are satisfied that the petitioner Union has made out a case that the circular issued on 29th June, 1988, on the basis of the objection raised by the Pension Department and other orders to which reference has been made in the writ petition regarding retirement of the work-charged employees who were taken on regular posts, to retire them at the age of 58 years, cannot be supported by the respondents as the same are contrary to decisions taken and the circulars issued by the Government prior to it and which are in force, are in no way illegal. 9. In the premises aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed and we hereby declare that the retirement brought about in pursuance of the Circular dated 29th June, 1988, and the orders of retirement retiring the employees, who were taken on regular cadre, by the different orders on or after 29th June, 1988, are all illegal and void and, we hereby direct that such employees will be deemed to be in continuous service and shall be entitled to all consequential benefits. 10. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs.Petition allowed. *******