Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 2333 (RAJ)

Har Dayal Arora v. State of Rajasthan

2007-12-06

P.B.MAJMUDAR

body2007
JUDGMENT 1. - Both these writ- petitions are directed against the judgment passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, whereby the Tribunal has partly allowed the appeal of the petitioner-employee by setting aside the order of recovery passed against the petitioner, but it did not accept the prayer to quash and set aside the order dated 10.10.1996, by which two additional grade increments earlier granted in favour of the petitioner, were withdrawn. The Tribunal held that the petitioner was not at fault in any manner in getting the benefit of the said additional two increments; therefore, the order of recovery passed against the petitioner cannot be sustained as there was no fault on the part of the petitioner, and the department itself had given the said benefit. The said order passed by the Tribunal has been challenged by the department by filing writ petition. So far as the petitioner-employee is concerned, since his prayer to release the two additional grade increments was not accepted, he has also filed writ petition. Since common point is involved in both these writ petitions, the same are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner-employee Mr. R.C. Joshi vehemently submits that at the relevant time the petitioner had already passed the examination through the Rajasthan Board of Secondary Education, wherein he was declared passed in English Stenography and Typing subject and, therefore, as per the rules, he was entitled to get two additional increments periodically. He, therefore, submits that the Tribunal has erred in not allowing the appeal of the petitioner-employee in toto by holding that the petitioner is entitled to such additional increments even in future. 3. Learned Dy.G.A. Mr. Sharma on the other hand submitted that the petitioner was not qualified to get the said increments as he had not passed the English Stenography and Typing Test through Rajasthan Public Service Commission (for short, 'RPSC'). 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record and the judgment of the Tribunal. 5. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was originally recruited as a Hindi Stenographer in the department as per his qualification as prescribed under Rule 12, reference of which is made at page 11 in the writ petition filed by the petitioner-employee, which is reproduced as under: "12. Academic qualifications. 5. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was originally recruited as a Hindi Stenographer in the department as per his qualification as prescribed under Rule 12, reference of which is made at page 11 in the writ petition filed by the petitioner-employee, which is reproduced as under: "12. Academic qualifications. (1) A candidate for direct recruitment to the stenographer's cadre: (a) must have passed Higher Secondary/Sr. Secondary Examination in Arts, Science or Commerce of Rajasthan Board of Secondary Education or an examination equivalent thereto recognised by the Government." At the time of initial recruitment, the petitioner was holding the academic qualification as prescribed under Rule 12 and had also passed the qualifying test in Hindi Stenography and Typing conducted by RPSC, therefore, he was appointed as Hindi Stenographer. So far as the question about additional increments is concerned, the relevant rules in this regard, which are framed under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, have been referred in Ex.4 at page 25 in the writ petition filed by the petitioner and which are in connection with Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Scales) Rules, 1989 in Schedule-IV Entry No. 14, relevant portion of which is reproduced as under: "(i) Higher initial pay of Rs. 1480/- shall be allowed to those stenographers who are appointed on passing qualifying tests both in Hindi and English Stenography and typing conducted by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission for the purpose of recruitment to the post of stenographer. (ii) Persons holding the post of stenographer/Personal Assistant/Senior Personal Assistant/Private Secretary or who may be appointed to these posts on passing qualifying test either in Hindi or English Stenography and typing, conducted by Rajasthan Public Service Commission shall be granted two advance increments with effect from the date they pass qualifying test of stenography and typing test in the second language (Hindi or English only) conducted by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission." 6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has not passed the English stenography and typing test from the RPSC or any other recognised institute of the State in this behalf. Learned counsel for the petitioner-employee Mr. Joshi vehemently submits that since the petitioner has passed the English Stenography and Typing examination from the Rajasthan Board of Secondary Examination, which is also statutory in character, the said benefit of additional increments should have been continued in favour of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner-employee Mr. Joshi vehemently submits that since the petitioner has passed the English Stenography and Typing examination from the Rajasthan Board of Secondary Examination, which is also statutory in character, the said benefit of additional increments should have been continued in favour of the petitioner. In my view, there is no substance in this argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is required to be noted that rules framed by the State under proviso to Article 309 quoted above, are statutory rules and there is clear provision that in order to avail additional increments, an employee is required to qualify additional test in second language through RPSC. So far as the initial appointment of the petitioner is concerned, it is not in dispute that as per the relevant recruitment rules, he was not entitled to get additional increments and he was required to clear the test in second language through RPSC for getting such additional increments. It is also required to be noted that passing of examination as a student from the Board of Secondary Education is different than passing an examination conducted by an employer or a board to find out suitability of a candidate for a particular post or purpose, as the nature of both the examinations are totally different; as one such examination is taken by the Board of Secondary Education, wherein students in schools appears for passing the standard 12th examination and so far as other examination is concerned, the same is taken by RPSC to find out the suitability of a candidate for employment. Accordingly, both the tests/examinations are different. The examination in question is taken by the RPSC for employment or higher pay scale or increments, as the case may be, and the RPSC is prescribed as statutory body to conduct such examination. In that view of the matter, the Tribunal is perfectly justified in not continuing the benefit of two additional increments by holding that petitioner is entitled to such benefit, as he has not cleared the required test through RPSC and surely passing an examination as a student through Board of Secondary Education cannot be equated with the same. 7. In that view of the matter, the Tribunal is perfectly justified in not continuing the benefit of two additional increments by holding that petitioner is entitled to such benefit, as he has not cleared the required test through RPSC and surely passing an examination as a student through Board of Secondary Education cannot be equated with the same. 7. Under these circumstances, I do not find any substance in the writ petition filed by the petitioner-employee and I find no error in the order of the Tribunal which is required to be corrected by this court under its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. So far as the writ petition filed by the State is concerned, since it is not in dispute that there was no fault on the part of the petitioner-employee to get two additional increments which were released due to some mistake which was subsequently rectified by withdrawing the said increments, no order of recovery could have been passed against the petitioner employee and therefore, the Tribunal has rightly set aside the order of recovery passed against the petitioner-employee. Considering the said aspect, no interference is called for in the order of the Tribunal. 8. Both these writ petitions are accordingly found to be devoid of merit and the same are dismissed with no order as to costs. It is also made clear that in case the petitioner-employee ultimately clears himself in the English Stenography and Typing test through RPSC as per the rules, at that time, his case may be considered for granting the additional increments and if the petitioner-employee is otherwise eligible for appearing in the said test, he may be permitted to appear in such test as and when the same is conducted.Writ Petition Dismissed. *******