Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 2505 (RAJ)

Jugal Kishore v. R. S. E. B.

2005-09-19

RAJESH BALIA

body2005
Judgment Rajesh Balia, J.-I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The facts which emerge from the pleadings of the parties may be noticed in order to understand the claim to reliefs made by the petitioner Jugal Kishore. 3. According to the petitioner, he was appointed as Meter Reader Gr. I vide order dated 212.1971 and he was not promoted for a considerable period. The matter was referred to an Arbitral Tribunal who made the award on 15.06.1979 which was duly published and according to Para No. 49 of the said award, a person who was holding the post in pay scales No. 1 to 6 and had remained stagnated for 11 years as on 1st April of each following year, he was entitled for the selection grade in the next higher pay scale. The first relief , therefore, is that the petitioner on completion of 11 years from his first appointment in December, 1971 ought to have been placed in the next higher pay scale w.e.f. December, 1982. 4. In this connection, he has also prayed that while persons appointed prior to 312.1970 and holding the post of Meter Reader for 8 years, they were promoted to Meter Inspectors Gr. I. On that premise, the petitioner said that cut off date of 30.12.1970 for extending the period of first promotion to the Meter Feeder on completion of 8 years satisfactory service was without any rational nexus with object sought to be achieved by such classification and, therefore, the petitioner ought to have been promoted from the date of first appointment as Meter Inspector Gr. I and ought to have been treated Meter Inspector Gr. I. The relevant part of petitioners claim was about stagnancy suffered by him on account of inaction on the part of the respondents. 5. The petition was filed on 21.05.1991 and admitted on 11.07.1991. The return was submitted on behalf of the respondents RSEB on 14.09.1999. No reply was given to the claim made to put in the next higher pay scale on account of selection scale on completion of 11 years service in terms of Para 49 of the Sancheti Award dated 15.06.1979 which had duly been published. The return was submitted on behalf of the respondents RSEB on 14.09.1999. No reply was given to the claim made to put in the next higher pay scale on account of selection scale on completion of 11 years service in terms of Para 49 of the Sancheti Award dated 15.06.1979 which had duly been published. In reply to the contention raised by the petitioner about Para 49 of the Award dated 15.06.1979 providing to convert the 20% of the posts of each category/ trade/ class of Technical workman in each of the pay scales 1 to 6 in selection grade posts for such of the regular employees fixed in regular pay scale against regular sanctioned post (not supernumerary), it was stated that the petitioner was appointed as Meter Reader-II in Nagaur Division where there was no sanctioned post of Meter Reader. Thus, post cannot be converted into selection grade post and, therefore, claim of the petitioner is without any basis and not maintainable. Incidentally, the respondents also alleged that the petitioner has given a wrong fact about his appointment as Meter Reader Gr. I. The date of appointment of the petitioner in December, 1971 was not disputed. 6. During the pendency of the writ petition, the Government order dated 25.01.1992 came into force for removing the stagnancy by granting selection pay scale at the interval of 9, 18, and 27 years of continuous service which envisaged that when no promotion has been granted during each spell of period, the incumbent may be given 1, 2, and 3 selection scale on completion of said period. The resolution of the Board adopted the aforesaid Government Order on 06.03.1992. The petitioner having completed 20 years service in March, 1992, he was allowed the second selection scale by order dated 06.03.1992 and, thereafter, he has been promoted to the post of Meter Inspector Gr. II vide order dated 112.1997. By grant of the second selection scale vide order dated 06.03.1992, the petitioner was put in the pay scale of 1400-40-1800-50-2300/-by treating him to be Meter Reader Gr. II. 7. The petitioner submitted a rejoinder clarifying that in 1968 there was only one grade and there were no two grades of Meter Inspectors. The petitioner had been appointed vide letter dated 112.1971 only as Meter Reader against vacant post. In the order of appointment, the post offered was not stated to be Meter Reader Gr. II. 7. The petitioner submitted a rejoinder clarifying that in 1968 there was only one grade and there were no two grades of Meter Inspectors. The petitioner had been appointed vide letter dated 112.1971 only as Meter Reader against vacant post. In the order of appointment, the post offered was not stated to be Meter Reader Gr. I or II as it is now being contended by the RSEB. He further referred to some litigation pending about the status of those Meter Readers who were appointed prior to 012.1972. He clearly pointed out that some petitions were pending before this Court about the status of Meter Readers appointed between 01.04.1968 to 012.1972. As per the schedule of available posts for RSEB there was only one class of Meter Reader and there were no two categories of Meter Readers Gr. I or II. 8. The controversy was decided by this Court on 112.1979 in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 1084/1979 holding the persons appointed during this period to be treated as Meter Readers Gr. I and to be fixed in the pay scale applicable thereto. 9. The petitioners case was also considered vide order dated 111.1980 by the respondents Board noticing that the like petition was also pending in the case of Brij Lal & Ors. and in the matter of writ petition filed by Shri Narendra Kumar. The aforesaid petitions which were decided in view of the above Judgment namely, the order of the Rajasthan High Court dated 112.1979 in D.B. Civil Special Appeal Nos. 103 to 109/1979 pertaining to Brijlal & Ors., there is no use in contesting the two writ petitions and they may also be given the benefit of the order. It was also stated by the Board that the benefit as accrued in compliance to the aforesaid decision of the High Court may also be given to all such employees who have been appointed as Meter Readers between 01.04.1968 to 012.1972. But persons appointed as Meter Reader-II after 012.1972 in the scale of Rs.80-5-110-6-152-7-194 will remain in the same scale. 10. These facts make it clear that the petitioners appointment as Meter Reader vide order dated 112.1971 has to be treated in the category of Meter Reader Gr. I as he was appointed between 01.04.1968 to 012.1972 and who were to be promoted in terms of the Bench decision of this Court dated 112.1979. 10. These facts make it clear that the petitioners appointment as Meter Reader vide order dated 112.1971 has to be treated in the category of Meter Reader Gr. I as he was appointed between 01.04.1968 to 012.1972 and who were to be promoted in terms of the Bench decision of this Court dated 112.1979. If this was so, the respondents claim and subsequent actions treating petitioner to be Meter Reader Gr. II only is per se erroneous and unjust on facts. This need to be remedied. 11. Once the petitioner succeeds in his case to be considered for Meter Reader Gr. I in accordance with the directions by this Court it is not in dispute that all persons appointed as Meter Readers between 01.04.1968 to 012.1972 have been promoted as Meter Inspectors, there is no reason why the petitioner be not given the same treatment. If the same treatment should have been allowed to the petitioner it would not have resulted in any person junior to the petitioner being given promotion or selection scale ahead of him. 12. The fact that persons junior to the petitioner and those who were similarly situated to the petitioner were given a better treatment by promoting them to the post of Meter Inspector Gr. I is also clear from Annexure-6 submitted by the petitioner in the rejoinder in response to the assertions made by the respondents that petitioner has been duly promoted alongwith other persons. 13. The petitioner has clearly made out from that document that while persons similarly situated below him in the same pay scale were promoted as Meter Inspector Gr. I, petitioner has been treated as Meter Reader Gr. II. 14. Be that as it may, as appointment of the petitioner as Meter Reader Gr. II is demonstrably erroneous and treatment of petitioner in the matter of providing opportunity on that basis cannot be sustained. 15. The respondents must, in consonance of justice, fairness and bereft of any arbitrariness, have to grant status to the petitioner of Meter Reader in terms of the Division Bench order dated 112.1979 and ought to have followed the same line of action in respect of petitioner and in not doing so, the respondents have affected petitioners rights. 16. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to treat the petitioner as Meter Reader Gr. 16. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to treat the petitioner as Meter Reader Gr. I w.e.f., the date of first appointment in terms of the order of this Court dated 112.1979, referred to above, and their own order dated 111.1980 (Annexure-4) submitted alongwith the petitioners rejoinder and consequently treat him promoted to the post of Meter Inspector Gr. I vide order dated 112.1979 and grant all consequential benefits flowing therefrom. Since, the petitioner has discharged the functions continuously, he may be paid the arrears of re-fixation in accordance with the aforesaid directions. The directions may be carried out within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 17. While giving effect to the above directions, the petitioners case for grant of selection scale in terms of Resolution dated 06.03.1992 adopting Government order dated 25.01.1992 be reviewed and any payments made as a result of grant of selection scale by treating his initial appointment as Meter Gr. II be adjusted against the emoluments to which he becomes entitled to as per above directions.