Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 2445 (RAJ)

Nathulal Sharma v. R. S. R. T. C. , Jaipur

2008-11-06

MOHAMMAD RAFIQ

body2008
Judgment Hon'ble RAFIQ, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the action of the respondents in not granting the benefit of third selection grade in terms of the scheme of the Government adopted by the respondent-Corporation. According to such scheme, if the employee is not able to get at least one promotion within a span of nine years he shall be granted selection grade in the pay scale of post on which he would be otherwise entitled to promotion. 3. The respondents in para No.5 of the reply have come out with a plea that the petitioner was awarded penalties in two disciplinary proceedings at the relevant time when his case fell due for grant of third selection grade on 14.7.1998. In one of which, he was awarded penalty of stoppage of two grade increments without commutative effect by order dated 14.3.1996 which remained into operative for a period of 14.7.1998 and in the other, he was awarded penalty of stoppage of one grade increment without cumulative effect vide order dated 14.9.1999, which remained effective upto 14.10.2000. The petitioner in the meantime upon attaining the age of superannuation retired from service on 31.1.2000. In the circumstances, the petitioner could not be granted the benefit of third selection scale due to aforesaid penalty orders. 3. What is contended by the respondents is that currency of penalty order was in existence which thwarted the grant of third selection grade to the petitioner, but at the same time they also insist that so long the disciplinary proceedings were pending against the petitioner, he would not be entitled to the such grade. The grant of selection scale being given in lieu of promotion, as per the given instructions, has to be based on the satisfactory service record. But mere pendency of the disciplinary proceedings cannot permanently deprive the employees of such right, which is analogous to the benefit of promotion. The selection grade is granted at every interval of nine years in order to remove stagnation the employee faces for so long. In the normal course, when an employee is facing disciplinary proceedings and his case becomes ripe for consideration for promotion, the sealed cover procedure is adopted, but eventually if the employee has been exonerated, then only the recommendations made by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) are given effect to only. In the normal course, when an employee is facing disciplinary proceedings and his case becomes ripe for consideration for promotion, the sealed cover procedure is adopted, but eventually if the employee has been exonerated, then only the recommendations made by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) are given effect to only. If however, he has been penalised, his case is liable to be again placed before the DPC for review consideration along with such penalty orders. In the case of grant of selection scale, such a procedure is not adopted but in the proceedings where penalty awarded is stoppage of one or two grade increments without cumulative effect, such selection scale would be correspondingly delayed by such number of years only and not for an indefinite period. 4. If what is contended by the respondents is accepted, that would mean that the employee would suffer on both the ends, once when the disciplinary proceedings is pending and another time, when the penalty is imposed, which in other words, would amount to double jeopardy and would be hit by Article 20 of the Constitution of India. 5. Penalty of stoppage of three grade increments without cumulative effect being imposed as aforesaid, and the third selection grade having become due, by own saying of the respondents, at the maximum could be delayed by three years, so to say, it could be deferred till 15.7.1999. Since on that date the petitioner was in service, he would be entitled to receive the benefit of third selection grade. 6. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to grant to the petitioner third selection grade w.e.f. 14.7.1999 and pay him all consequential benefits with interest @ 6% per annum. 7. Compliance of the judgment be made within three months from the date its copy is produced before the respondents.