JUDGMENT 1. - The petitioner has filed the present writ petition with the prayer that the respondents may be directed to pay to the petitioner salary in the pay scale of Rs. 490-840 w.e.f. 1.5.1984, in the pay scale of Rs. 880-1680 w.e.f. 1.9.1986 and in the pay scale of Rs. 950-1680 w.e.f. 1.9.88 with arrears throughout along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. It has further been prayed that respondents may be directed to declare the petitioner permanent on the post of Store Munshi and give him the status of permanent Store Munshi with all consequential benefits. 2. In the writ petition it has been averred that the petitioner was initially appointed as work-charged employee w.e.f. 1.10.1978 and was posted in the office of Asstt. Engineer, Bhim Sagar Sub Division, Dam Site, Irrigation Department, Jhalawar. He was thereafter posted as Work-charged Store Munshi w.e.f. 1.12.1978 in the same office. On completion of 2 years of service on the post of Store Munshi, he was declared semi permanent on the post of Store Munshi w.e.f. 1.12.1980 vide order dated 2.1.1981. Although the petitioner was actually working on the post of Store Munshi having grade of Rs. 355-570 at the relevant time, the respondents vide order dated 1.5.1982, fixed him in the pay-scale of Rs: 280-455 w.e.f. 1.5.1982. The petitioner represented against this and personally appeared before the respondent No. 4 (Executive Engineer) and submitted that he is secondary school pass and since he is discharging the duties of the post of Store Munshi, therefore, he may be granted pay scale of Rs. 355-570 as the Store Munshis, who were Secondary pass were entitled to pay scale of Rs. 355-570 while those who were non-metric were given lower pay scale. He in this connection, submitted representations to the respondents on 25th Sept. 1982 and 11th Oct., 1982 wherein he cited some examples of S/Shri Prakash Chandra Saraswat, Amar Singh and Dinesh Vyas (Munshies), who were given pay scale of Munshi i.e. 355-570. Thereafter, the petitioner made number of representations on 15.4.1983, 2.4.1983, 18.6.1983, 21.7.1983 and 29.12.1983. Thereafter, in the year 1983, the petitioner's request was accepted by the respondents when the Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Scale) Rules, 1982 (for short 'the Rules of 1982') came into force w.e.f. 1.9.81 and the petitioner was fixed in the pay scale of Rs. Thereafter, the petitioner made number of representations on 15.4.1983, 2.4.1983, 18.6.1983, 21.7.1983 and 29.12.1983. Thereafter, in the year 1983, the petitioner's request was accepted by the respondents when the Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Scale) Rules, 1982 (for short 'the Rules of 1982') came into force w.e.f. 1.9.81 and the petitioner was fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 490-840, i.e., the revised pay scale of Rs. 355-570 w.e.f. 1.1.82 vide order dated 24th Feb., 1984. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner was also paid arrears w.e.f. 1.1.1982. 3. Suddenly, the respondents passed an order dated 4th June, 1984 cancelling the order dated 24.2.1984 with immediate effect and it was directed that the petitioner will be paid salary in the old pay scale till the clarification is received from the Chief Engineer (respondent No. 2). The petitioner made representation against the order dated 4th June, 1984 to the respondent No. 4 (Executive Engineer) on 9.6.1984 and requested for restoration of the order dated 24th Feb., 1984. When nothing was heard, the petitioner made representation to the Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Kota (respondent No. 3) on 30th Nov., 1987, who in turn wrote a letter on 23rd Dec., 1987 to the respondent No. 4 asking for his comments. Thereafter, on 11.1.1988, the respondent No. 4 sent his comments to the respondent No. 3 wherein he stated that the petitioner was appointed as Helper on 1.10.78 and thereafter, from 1.12.78 he was appointed on the post of Store Munshi and since then he was continuously discharging the duties of Store Munshi and his performance was satisfactory. The respondent No. 4 in response to the another quarry made by the respondent No. 3 by letter dated 11th March, 1988, recommended the case of the petitioner that if the petitioner is given the pay scale of Munshi, it would be in the interest of the Government. It was stated that the petitioner was regularly working on the post of Store Munshi against the vacant post of Store Munshi Grade-I. The respondent No. 4 vide letter dated 9.6.1989 recommended the case of the petitioner for fixing him in the pay scale of Rs. 490-840. Thereafter, the respondent No. 3 vide his letter dated 11.7.1989 asked the respondent No. 4 to send the entire case to the Asstt. Accounts Officer, Irrigation Circle, Kota on the premise that it was a case of pay fixation. 490-840. Thereafter, the respondent No. 3 vide his letter dated 11.7.1989 asked the respondent No. 4 to send the entire case to the Asstt. Accounts Officer, Irrigation Circle, Kota on the premise that it was a case of pay fixation. In response to the aforesaid letter, the respondent No. 4 vide communication dated 21.7.1989 informed that it was not a case of pay fixation but it was a case of grant of pay scale of the post of Store Munshi, which had already been paid to the petitioner from Jan., 1982 to April, 1984. When nothing was done, the petitioner submitted representation to the Irrigation Minister, which he simultaneously endorsed to Addl. Chief Engineer, Irrigation Zone, Kota, who in turn wrote letter dated 17.8.1990 to the respondent No. 4 forwarding the petitioner's original application and asked the respondent No. 4 to pass necessary orders within a period of 15 days under the intimation to the Addl. Chief Engineer, Kota. Instead of doing so, the respondent No. 4 (Executive Engineer) wrote a letter dated 31st Oct., 1990 to the respondent No. 3 forwarding the entire service record of the petitioner and requested for grant of pay scale of Store Munshi to the petitioner. The respondent No. 3 then sent his reply to the Addl. Chief Engineer, Irrigation Zone, Kota requesting him to give directions for giving the pay scale of Rs. 490-840 to the petitioner. The petitioner's service roll, personal file and other letters were also sent along with this letter. In response to the letter of the respondent No. 3, the Addl. Chief Engineer sent a letter dated 15.1.1991 to the respondent No. 4 directing him to give pay scale of Rs. 490-840 to the petitioner immediately on the basis of his qualification and norms of the post. The respondent No. 4 thereafter wrote a letter to the Addl. Chief Engineer, Irrigation Zone, Kota that although the petitioner was entitled for the pay scale of Rs. 490-840 but he was not competent to pass such orders. Then the respondent No. 4 received the letter dated 21st March, 1991 from the Addl. Chief Engineer, Irrigation Zone, Kota to which, the respondent No. 4 sent his reply stating therein that the petitioner's case was not of a promotion but fixing in wrong pay scale. 490-840 but he was not competent to pass such orders. Then the respondent No. 4 received the letter dated 21st March, 1991 from the Addl. Chief Engineer, Irrigation Zone, Kota to which, the respondent No. 4 sent his reply stating therein that the petitioner's case was not of a promotion but fixing in wrong pay scale. It was at this stage, the petitioner realised that he may not get justice with the hands of the respondents, therefore, he served a notice for demand of justice on them on 31st August, 1991 and finally filed the present writ petition. 4. The writ petition was contested by the respondents, who in their reply have stated that the petitioner was entitled to get the status of semi-permanent on the post of Munshi Grade-II only. He at the time of his initial appointment on 5.12.78, did not submit his Secondary School Certificate, therefore, an entry to this effect was not made in his service record. It was also pointed out that at the relevant time i.e., in the year 1978, when the petitioner was given appointment, the maximum age prescribed for giving appointment in the said service was 28 years. However, in the Secondary School Certificate, the date of birth of the petitioner was mentioned as 23.3.49 and if this date of birth was accepted, the petitioner was of 29 years old at the time of appointment. Since the petitioner was over age, he could never be appointed in the respondent department on 5.12.78. It was also submitted that the petitioner was knowing it very well deliberately did not submit his secondary school certificate when he was initially appointed. It was submitted that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Helper on daily wages basis on 5.12.78 and, thereafter, he was appointed on the post of Munshi Grade-II w.e.f. 21.12.78. He was never appointed on the post of Store Munshi, as would be evident from Annex. 1, which is his initial appointment order, in which his name was mentioned at S.No. 1. The petitioner never discharged the duties on the post of Store Munshi. Since the petitioner was granted semi-permanent status on the post of Munshi Grade-II as per Annex. 1, therefore, he was rightly fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 280-455. It is also averred that Annex. The petitioner never discharged the duties on the post of Store Munshi. Since the petitioner was granted semi-permanent status on the post of Munshi Grade-II as per Annex. 1, therefore, he was rightly fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 280-455. It is also averred that Annex. 1 was issued on 2.1.81 and in the said order it was mentioned that the petitioner was holding the post of Munshi Grade-II 2nd at the relevant time, he was also paid the pay scale of the same, but he never objected to the same. The petitioner although in some of the representations mentioned himself as Secondary School pass but he did not submit copy of such certificate. It was also submitted that petitioner has also not submitted his Secondary School certificate along with the present writ petition and thus, the petitioner has always tried to hide the said certificate. Merely because the petitioner is having the certificate of Secondary School would not entitle him to the post of Store Munshi/Munshi Grade-I because it always depended on the availability of the sanctioned post. More so, the respondents stated that the petitioner was only entitled to promotion to the post of Munshi Grade-I as per the rules. With regard to S/Sh. Prakash Chandra Saraswat, Amar Singh and Dinesh Vyas, it was submitted that their initial appointments were made on the post of Munshi Grade-I. So far as for the post of Store Munshi is concerned, it being a promotion post, the same will be filled up by 100% promotion. The order dated 24.2.84 was erroneously passed and when this mistake was came to the knowledge of the respondents, the same was rectified vide order dated 4.6.84 cancelling the order dated 24.2.84. It was stated that vide Annex. 10, 21 persons were given the said revised pay scale of Rs. 490-840 but except the petitioner, no other person/employees mentioned in the said order took the arrears. Since the petitioner was the Joint Secretary of the Irrigation Labour Union, he by using his influence got sanctioned his arrears, which are recoverable from the petitioner. The petitioner never worked on the post of Store Munshi Grade-I and even if any sanctioned post was available with the respondents, he would not become entitled to get appointment on such post. Since the petitioner was the Joint Secretary of the Irrigation Labour Union, he by using his influence got sanctioned his arrears, which are recoverable from the petitioner. The petitioner never worked on the post of Store Munshi Grade-I and even if any sanctioned post was available with the respondents, he would not become entitled to get appointment on such post. It was also submitted that as per facts stated by the petitioner himself, he was never appointed on the post of Store Munshi. So far as issuing of any letter by the respondent No. 3 is concerned, it was submitted that the same was issued under some mistaken belief and for want of complete knowledge of the facts. It was submitted that though the petitioner has made repeated representations, but by such representations would not improve his case because his initial appointment itself was made on the post of Munshi Grade-II and, therefore, even if an order was passed by mistake fixing him in the pay scale of Munshi Grade-I, the respondents cannot be precluded from rectifying such mistake. 5. An application to bring on record the legal representatives of the petitioner was filed during the pendency of the writ petition as the sole petitioner has expired on 26.11.2004. This application was allowed vide order of this Court dated 25.11.2005. 6. During the course of arguments, an additional affidavit was also filed by the respondents in which it was contended that in the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks relief of salary under the pay scale of Rs. 950-1680 and such relief has been granted to the petitioner i.e., the pay-scale of Rs. 950-1680 on the post of Store Munshi Grade-I w.e.f. 1st, March, 1994 vide order dated 8.4.1999 and this order has been brought on record. In the additional affidavit it has also been stated that since their were excess employees in the department, therefore, some employees have been declared surplus including the petitioner. The petitioner has been absorbed as Gram Sevak in Panchayat Samiti Pidawa. It has, therefore, been submitted that since the relief prayed for has been granted to the petitioner and he has died during the pendency of the, writ petition, the writ petition has become infructuous and the same deserves to be dismissed. 7. I have heard Shri Prahlad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Shri Ashwini Kumar, Dy. It has, therefore, been submitted that since the relief prayed for has been granted to the petitioner and he has died during the pendency of the, writ petition, the writ petition has become infructuous and the same deserves to be dismissed. 7. I have heard Shri Prahlad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Shri Ashwini Kumar, Dy. Government Advocate for the respondent and perused the record. 8. Shri Prahlad Singh learned counsel for the petitioner argued that once when the petitioner was fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 490-840 w.e.f. 1.5.84 and in revised the pay scale of Rs. 880-1680 w.e.f. 1.9.86 and 950-1680 w.e.f. 1.9.88, then withholding the same by order dated 4th June, 1984 was illegal and arbitrary. Such order was passed without any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner's appointment was made against the post of Store Munshi Grade-I and he has been actually working on the post of Store Munshi Grade-I and it was in recognition of this fact that he was granted the pay scale of such post. He argued that the petitioner made number of representations starting from 1984 and last representation was made on 7.10.91 but no action was taken by the respondents to fix him in the pay scale of Munshi Grade-I. Various functionaries of the respondents exchanged correspondence interse instead of taking any decision in this matter and this was nothing, but an inaction on the part of the respondents. The petitioner was not granted the pay scale of Store Munshi Grade-I even though the Executive Engineer recommended his case on the basis of Educational qualification, which he was holding. He argued that the action of the respondents is discriminatory because other persons named above, having similar qualification, were given the benefit of pay scale of Rs. 490-840. The petitioner was entitled to be declared permanent on the post of Store Munshi as he has by now completed 10 years of satisfactory service and inaction on the part of the respondents in not declaring him permanent contravened Rule 3(3) of the Work Charged Service Rules, 1964. 9. On the other hand, Shri Ashwini Kumar, learned Dy. 490-840. The petitioner was entitled to be declared permanent on the post of Store Munshi as he has by now completed 10 years of satisfactory service and inaction on the part of the respondents in not declaring him permanent contravened Rule 3(3) of the Work Charged Service Rules, 1964. 9. On the other hand, Shri Ashwini Kumar, learned Dy. Government Advocate appearing for the respondents argued that the petitioner's initial appointment was made on the post of Munshi Grade-II and, therefore, on his completing two years of service, he was declared semi-permanent on the post of Store Munshi Grade-II vide Annex. 1 dated 2.1.1981 w.e.f. 1.12.1980. The petitioner never objected to this order and continued to work. He on completion of 10 years of service subject to availability of post, was entitled to be declared permanent on the post of Store Munshi Grade-II. However, in the meantime, he was wrongly paid the scale of Rs. 490-840 by order dated 24.2.1984 w.e.f. 1.1.82. When this fact was came to the notice of the higher authorities, this order was immediately withdrawn and mistake was rectified by cancelling this order vide impugned order dated 4th June, 1984. Since the order dated 4th June, 1984 was passed rectifying the earlier mistake, there was no question of violation of principle of natural justice or any discrimination. He also denied that the petitioner was in any manner discriminated because of the action of the respondents. Three names given by the petitioner are all those who were appointed on the post of Store Munshi Grade-I from the date of their initial appointment on the basis of their educational qualification, i.e., Secondary School Certificate, but the petitioner did not disclose his certificate because he knew that on the date of his initial appointment he was over age. He has argued that the present writ petition being abnormally delayed is liable to be dismissed because the petitioner could not explain the delay. It was also argued that since the respondents themselves have granted the relief prayed for in this petition to the petitioner, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed as having become infructuous. He has further argued that several employees have been declared surplus including the petitioner and the petitioner has been absorbed as Gram Sevak, Panchayat Samiti Pidawa, therefore, on this count also, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed. 10. He has further argued that several employees have been declared surplus including the petitioner and the petitioner has been absorbed as Gram Sevak, Panchayat Samiti Pidawa, therefore, on this count also, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed. 10. I have considered the arguments advanced by Shri Prahlad Singh learned counsel for the petitioner 9s well as Shri Ashwini Kumar Sharma learned Dy. Government Advocate and perused the record. 11. It would be evident from the order Annex. 1 dated 2.1.1981 that the petitioner was made semi-permanent on the post of Munshi Grade-11 w.e.f. 1.12.1980 and thereafter he was fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 280-455 w.e.f. 1.5.1982 vide order dated 1.5.1982. The petitioner at this stage represented to the respondent vide Annex.' 3 dated 25th Sept. 1982 and, thereafter ,another representation was submitted on 11.10.1982 in which he stated that since he was having the qualification of Secondary School pass and other persons namely S/Sh. Prakash Chandra Saraswat, Amar Singh and Dinesh Vyas were straight away granted the pay scale of Munshi Grade-I, therefore, he should also be fixed in the said pay scale. The petitioner then made representations on 15.4.1983 and 2.4.1983 again citing the cases of the persons having similar qualification who were granted the pay scale of Store Munshi Grade-I. He thereafter made further representations on 18th June, 1983, 21.7.1983 and 29.12.1983. It was, thereafter, the respondents passed the order dated 24.2.1984 whereby the pay scale of Rs. 490-840 was granted to the petitioner and he was paid arrears also w.e.f. 1.1.1982. In view of the repeated representations made by the petitioner to ventilate his grievance citing examples of several others similarly situated persons, I cannot accept the arguments had accepted the correctness of the order dated 2.1.81 whereby he was made semi-permanent on the post of Store Munshi Grade-II and that he was not actually working on the post of Store Munshi Grade-I. The respondents subsequently withdrew the order dated 24.2.1984 vide order dated 4th June, 1984, but in that order it was stated that the employees mentioned in the order dated 24.2.1984 shall continue to get old pay scale on the basis of qualification which they are/were getting till clarification was received from Chief Engineer. The petitioner made several representations to the respondents drawing their attention to the fact that he was entitled to be paid on the post of Store Munshi Grade-I as in the cases of several other employees having similar qualification who have been fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 490-840 and even the petitioner vide order dated 24.2.1984 was granted the pay scale of Store Munshi Grade- I. It appears that comments were sought from the Executive Engineer by the Superintending Engineer. The Executive Engineer vide his letter Annex. 17 dated 11.1.1988 clarified that the petitioner was appointed as Helper on 1.10.1978 and, thereafter, he was appointed on the post of Store Munshi from 1.12.1978 and since then he had been working continuing on the post of Store Munshi, but the pay scale of Munshi was given to the petitioner. It has also been stated in the letter dated 11.1.1988 that his work was satisfactory. The Superintending Engineer again by his letter dated 19.2.1988 (Annex. 18) called for the comments from the Executive Engineer. In response to this, the Executive Engineer by letter dated 11.3.1988 (Annex. 19) informed that if the petitioner is given the pay scale of Munshi, it would be in the interest of the Government. The Superintending Engineer again vide his letter dated 18th. Nov., 1988 asked for report within 10 days and that was replied by the Executive Engineer in the similar term. The Superintending Engineer vide his letter dated 11.7.1989 asked the Executive Engineer to sent the entire case to the Asstt. Accounts Officer, Irrigation Circle, Kota on the premise that it was a case of fixation. Thereafter, the Executive Engineer vide letter dated 21.7.1989 informed that it was not a case of pay fixation but it was a case of grant of pay scale on the post of Store Munshi which has already been paid to the petitioner from Jan., 1982 to April, 1984. On several times communications were forwarded by the Superintending Engineer as well as Executive Engineer, but despite this no relief was granted to the petitioner and hence, the petitioner ultimately made representation to the Irrigation Minister who in turn sent his application to the Addl. On several times communications were forwarded by the Superintending Engineer as well as Executive Engineer, but despite this no relief was granted to the petitioner and hence, the petitioner ultimately made representation to the Irrigation Minister who in turn sent his application to the Addl. Chief Engineer, Irrigation Zone, Kota and he sent a letter dated 17.8.1990 to the Superintending Engineer to pass necessary orders within a period of 15 days and the result of the same should be intimated to the Addl. Chief Engineer, Kota. The Executive Engineer thereafter sent a copy of the letter of the Addl. Chief Engineer, Kota to the Superintending Engineer for necessary action. The Superintending Engineer vide his letter dated 31.10.1990 again enclosing the service record, personal file and Photostat copies of the letters directed Executive Engineer for grant of pay scale of Store Munshi Grade-I to the petitioner. However, vide letter dated 27th Nov., 1990, the Executive Engineer requested the Addl. Chief Engineer, Irrigation Zone, Kota requesting him to give directions for giving the pay scale of Rs. 490-840 to the petitioner. The Addl. Chief Engineer vide his letter dated 15.1.1991 gave direction to the Executive Engineer to give the pay scale of Rs. 490-840 to the petitioner on the basis of his qualification and norms of the post. The Executive Engineer vide his letter dated 15.2.1991 thereafter informed the Addl. Chief Engineer that although the petitioner is entitled to the said pay scale, but he was no competent to pass the order granting the same. 12. I have analyzed all these documents in order to show indifferent and lackadaisical attitude of the functionaries of the respondents State. All the above letters show that the officials of the State Government were merely passing the buck to one another instead of taking any decision at their level. They have repeatedly recommended the case of the petitioner for grant of pay scale on the basis of his educational qualification, but did not take responsibility on their shoulder to grant the same. This clearly reflects casualness on the part of the senior functionaries of the State in redressing grievances of its employees. The petitioner has taken pains to produce large number of documents, which includes several representations as well as letters exchanged interse between various State functionaries. This clearly reflects casualness on the part of the senior functionaries of the State in redressing grievances of its employees. The petitioner has taken pains to produce large number of documents, which includes several representations as well as letters exchanged interse between various State functionaries. The petitioner was entitled to be granted the pay scale on the part of Store Munshi Grade-I when he was declared semi-permanent vide order dated 2.1.81, but subsequently, when said scale was granted to the petitioner vide order dated 24.2.1984, there was no reason to withdraw the respondents by order dated 4.6.84. In this order dated 4.6.84 withdrawing the order dated 24.2.1984 it was stated that incumbent mentioned in the order dated 24.2.84 including the petitioner would continue to draw the salary in the earlier pay scale till clarification was received from the Chief Engineer, which never came about. The petitioner was deprived of his legitimate due for a long time even though many of his fellow workers were allowed the pay scale of Store Munshi Grade-I from the date of their initial appointment. 13. In view of the above discussion, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 4.6.1984 is quashed and set aside the respondents are directed to restore the pay scale of Rs. 490-840 w.e.f. 1.1.82 with all consequential pay fixation in all subsequent revised pay scales with arrears of salary along with interest @ 6% per annum within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.No order as to costs.Impugned order set aside. *******