Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1233 (RAJ)

S. H. Qureshi v. State of Rajasthan

2018-05-09

ARUN BHANSALI

body2018
JUDGMENT Arun Bhansali, J. - The application filed by the petitioner seeking preponment of the date fixed by the office is allowed. 2. The matter is taken up for orders. At the request of learned counsel for the parties, the matter has been finally heard. 3. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:- "(i) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondent University may be directed to revise the pension of the petitioner treating the minimum pay- scale of 37400-67000+9000 G.P. and make payment of pension accordingly w.e.f. 1.4.2008. (ii) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may be directed to pay the arrears of revised pension along with interest @ 12% per annum as per Rule 89 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951. (iii) any other appropriate order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner; (iv) Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to be petitioner." 4. The petitioner, who was working as Assistant Professor with the respondent University and was in receipt of selection scale granted w.e.f. 08.04.2000, retired on 30.06.2004. The Government of Rajasthan issued a memorandum providing the pension to the pensioners prior to 10.09.2006 by order dated 12.09.2008. 5. Pursuant thereto, the Governor of Rajasthan granted revision of existing scales of pay w.e.f. 01.01.2006. However, the communication dated 08.08.2011 was issued by the Dy. Director, Department of Agriculture informing the Registrar, Rajasthan Agriculture University, Bikaner that the benefit of revised pay scales will not be allowed to the Assistant Professors, who have been designated as Professor/Associate under Career Advancement Scheme. 6. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the said communication dated 08.08.2011 was challenged by filing writ petition being S.B.C.W.P. No. 11056/2012 by Rajasthan Agriculture University Retired Teachers Society, Jaipur, which came to be allowed by order dated 24.11.2014, wherein, the said communication has been quashed. 7. It is further submitted that D.B. Civil Special Appeal (W) No. 58/2015 filed against the order dated 24.11.2014 has also been rejected by the Division Bench on 19.07.2016 and, therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to the same relief. 8. 7. It is further submitted that D.B. Civil Special Appeal (W) No. 58/2015 filed against the order dated 24.11.2014 has also been rejected by the Division Bench on 19.07.2016 and, therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to the same relief. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents are not in a position to dispute the said fact that the decisions have been rendered by the Single Judge and Division Bench at Jaipur, which cover the controversy raised in the present case. 9. On query, it has also been indicated that the order of Division Bench has not been challenged before Hon'ble Supreme Court. 10. This Court in the case of Rajasthan Agriculture University Retired Teachers Society (supra) directed as under:- "In view of the above discussion, action of the respondents in refusing the benefit of pension with effect from 01.04.2008 in accordance with para 5 of the notification of the Government dated 12.09.2002 to Professors/Associate Professors/Assistant Professor (Selection Grade) of the respondent University is declared to be arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Resultantly, impugned communication dated 08.08.2011 (Annexure-1) is quashed and set aside. Respondents are directed to pay to the members of petitioner-Society and other similarly situated persons, who were promoted as Professors/Associate Professors/Assistant Professors (Selection Grade) against ex-cadre posts in the career advancement scheme, and retired prior to 01.01.2006 from the service of the respondent University, the benefit of revision of pension with effect from 01.04.2008, according to para 5 of the notification dated 12.09.2008. The consequential benefits shall carry interest on the arrears thereof at the rate of 6% per annum from the date they accrue till actual payment thereof. Compliance be made within three months from the date a copy of this order is produced before the respondents." 11. The Division Bench in its judgment dated 19.07.2016 opined as under:- "We have considered the respective submissions. The order dated 08.08.2011 was the fulcrum of the entire controversy. None of the parties have been taken by surprise and knew the case they had to meet and the issues involved. We are not inclined to entertain the technical objection, especially when the State Government which authored the communication dated 08.08.2011 has chosen not to file any appeal. The appeal is dismissed." 12. In view of the above fact situation, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. We are not inclined to entertain the technical objection, especially when the State Government which authored the communication dated 08.08.2011 has chosen not to file any appeal. The appeal is dismissed." 12. In view of the above fact situation, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. Petitioner would be entitled to all the benefits as directed to be given in the case of Rajasthan Agriculture University Retired Teachers Society (supra). 13. Needful may be done by the respondents within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before them.