Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1861 (RAJ)

Dr. Rajshree Ranawat v. State

2015-11-04

GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS

body2015
JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Upon application filed by the petitioner, the name of respondent No.2, against which no relief is claimed, is hereby deleted from the array of the respondents. Amended cause-tile has already been filed, the same is hereby taken on record. 3. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Dr. Rajshree Ranawat, who was selected on the post of Assistant Professor (English) and provided appointment vide order dated 13.2.2013 on probation for two years by the respondent University for seeking following direction:- "(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature thereof thereby respondents be directed to fix the petitioner in regular pay scale since her joining and also directed to provide all consequential benefits like regular employees. (ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature thereof thereby the respondents be directed to art give arrears since initial appointment, (iii) Issue any other writ order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner." 4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that in the appointment order dated 13.2.2013 (Annex.3), it was specifically incorporated that candidates are appointed on the post of Assistant Professor in the pay band of Rs. 15600-39100/- with AGP of Rs. 6000/- on probation for two years and will be paid fixed salary of Rs. 18,200/- but it was later on increased to Rs. 24,000/-. Further, it is argued that in the judgment dt. 29.7.2015 rendered by Division Bench of this Court in DB Civil Writ Petition No. 2963/2007 (Gopal Kumawat v. State of Raj.) , the notification issued by the Government dated 13.3.2006 whereby order for fixed salary of probationers has been quashed, therefore, respondent University may be directed to allow regular pay-scale from the date of initial appointment. 5. 29.7.2015 rendered by Division Bench of this Court in DB Civil Writ Petition No. 2963/2007 (Gopal Kumawat v. State of Raj.) , the notification issued by the Government dated 13.3.2006 whereby order for fixed salary of probationers has been quashed, therefore, respondent University may be directed to allow regular pay-scale from the date of initial appointment. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the day on which appointment on the post of Assistant Professor (English) was given by the respondent University to the petitioner, she is getting fixed salary but now on completion of probation period of two years, the respondent University, which is statutory body is under obligation to consider her case for granting regular pay-scale and confirmation but University is not considering her case for confirmation and regular pay scale in spite of the fact that process of selection of the selected candidates by the University has already been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court in DB Civil Writ Petition No. 13382/2012 (Deepak Bhardawaj v. Jai Narayan Vyas University, Jodhpur) and other writ petitions. 6. As per learned counsel for the petitioner now there is no restriction upon the respondent University to grant benefit of confirmation/regularization as well as the pay-scale prescribed for the post after completion of two years service on probation, therefore, respondent University may be directed to confirm the services of the petitioner on the post of Assistant Professor in English subject and grant all benefits. 7. As directed by this Court, the Registrar of the respondent University present along with counsel for the University. While filing reply, the counsel for the respondent University submits that after the judgment of Division Bench of this Court, matter has been referred to the Government vide communication dated 28.9.2015 for seeking opinion of the Government to grant regular benefits on completion of probation period by the selected candidates but before sending the said communication, an order was received by the University on 15.4.2015 from the Joint Secretary, Higher Education, Govt, of Rajasthan whereby committee constituted to make inquiry of the process of selection in which condition No.7 was incorporated whereby the State Government issued direction to keep process of regularisation in abeyance, therefore, University is not in position to consider the case of selected candidates for confirmation and regularization. 8. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have perused the entire writ petition and reply filed by the respondent University. 9. It emerges from the reply of the respondent University that before the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in various cases including in case of Deepak Bhardwaj (supra), a communication dated 15.4.2015 was received by the University issued by the Government whereby a committee was constituted to make an enquiry with regard to process of selection and after the judgment, the University sent communication dated 28.9.2015 to the Joint Secretary, Higher Education (Group-IV) Department, Government of Rajasthan to seek opinion whether the University can grant regular pay-scale to the Assistant Professors who were provided appointment in the year 2013 on completion of two years probation without their confirmation but till today, no reply is received by the University to grant such benefit as prayed by the selected candidates. 10. In the opinion of this Court when matter has been adjudicated by Division Bench of this Court in case of Deepak Bhardwaj (supra) and selections are held to be in consonance with law then the University cannot deny the benefit of regularization/confirmation and pay-scale to the selected candidates while taking shelter of order dated 15.4.2015 because the Joint Secretary, Govt, of Rajasthan who has written the letter dated 15.4.2015 is not higher than the Division Bench of this Court delivered the judgments and held that the selections are in consonance with law, therefore, the order dated 15.4.2015 has loose its sanctity for all purpose and became redundant after adjudication made by the Division Bench of this Court with regard to selection process in which petitioner and other candidates were selected in pursuance of advertisement Annexure-1. The University is a statutory body, therefore, the University is duty bound to comply the terms and conditions of the appointment order made in favour of the selected candidates because the selection has already been declared valid by the Division Bench of this Court. 11. The University is a statutory body, therefore, the University is duty bound to comply the terms and conditions of the appointment order made in favour of the selected candidates because the selection has already been declared valid by the Division Bench of this Court. 11. In view of above now when the matter has already been adjudicated by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in case of Deepak Bhardwaj (supra) and other connected matters, the selected candidates are entitled for regularization/confirmation as well as pay-scale on completion of probation period, therefore, it is held that denial of confirmation/regularization and pay-scale to the selected candidates in pursuance of advertisement No. 74/2011-12 is totally illegal, unconstitutional and contrary to the basic principles of law. In view of above, this writ petition is hereby allowed and the respondent University is directed to grant confirmation/regularization and pay-scale to the petitioner prescribed for the post of Assistant Professor (English) as per terms and conditions of the appointment order dated 13.2.2013 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.Petition allowed. *******