Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 1706 (RAJ)

Asha Ram v. The Chairman cum Managing Director

2005-07-05

R.P.VYAS

body2005
Judgment R.P. Vyas, J.-Heard at admission stage. 2. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer that the respondents be directed to grant benefit of one grade increment in terms of the provisions contained in Regulation 10(1)(a) of the Rajasthan State Electricity Board Employees (Emoluments) Regulations, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations of 1978.) 3. The main grievance of the petitioner, in the instant petition is that the petitioner is entitled to get one grade increment on 01.04.1974 and under Table No. 1, Scale No. 1 and Scale No. 2, he is also entitled to the benefit of jump of Rs. 17 in conformity with the provisions of Regulations of 1978. 4. It has been averred by the petitioner that as per provisions of Regulation 10(1)(a) of the Regulations, the petitioner is entitled to get one grade increment as he has completed continuous service of 3 years or more, but less than 6 yeas on the post held on 01.04.1974. 5. It has also been averred by the petitioner that controversy regarding grant of advance grade increment and benefit of jump under the Regulations is no more res integra and stands decided by this Court in the case of S.B. CWP No. 1560/99 - Bhola Ram vs. RSEB, and the observations made by this Court have been affirmed by the Division Bench as well as Honble Supreme Court. 6. Further case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has submitted a number of representations, but to no avail. 7. In the instant case, the petitioner has made a number of representations, but his grievance has not been redressed so far, nor any speaking order has been passed. 8. During the course of arguments, it has been requested by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that looking to the facts and circumstances of the instant case, the concerned authority be directed to consider the representation of the petitioner in light of the observations made by this Court in the case of Bhola Ram and affirmed by the Honble Supreme Court as well as in light of provisions of Regulation 10(1)(a) of the Regulations. Since, the request of the petitioner is only for consideration of the representation, therefore, the instant petition is disposed of , at this stage, by giving a direction the concerned authority to consider the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law only. Since, the request of the petitioner is only for consideration of the representation, therefore, the instant petition is disposed of , at this stage, by giving a direction the concerned authority to consider the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law only. 9. Thus, this writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of in the manner that the petitioner is directed to file a fresh representation within a period of 15 days from today and the concerned authority shall consider and decide the same either way in accordance with law in light of the observations made by this Court in the case of Bhola Ram and affirmed by the Honble Supreme Court as well as in light of provisions of Regulation 10(1)(a) of the Regulations, within a period of one month. If it is found that the petitioner is entitled for any relief in accordance with law, then the same may be given to the petitioner within a period of one month and if the petitioner is not found entitled to the relief sought for, then a reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with law, may be passed.