Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 2242 (RAJ)

Mahesh Chand Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan

2019-08-21

PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

body2019
ORDER : Dr. Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. 1. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue in this writ petition has been decided by this Court in the case of Radha Krishna Bairwa Vs. State of Rajasthan: SBCWP No. 15403/2016 decided on 1.2.2017. The order reads as follows: "It appears that the petitioners have been fixed in the pay scale of Gram Sewak not from the date of their absorption but on completion of 10 years of service as Gram Sewak as reveals from the order dt. 2.10.2010 in terms of condition no. 5(x) & that came to be challenged in the batch of writ petitions at Principal Seat Jodhpur and the ld. Single Judge disposed of the petitions vide judgment dt. 31.7.2013 in SBCWP No. 6401/2011 Ashok Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors along with 20 other writ petitions setting aside the condition no. 5(x) of the order dt. 2.10.2010 with further direction that the writ petitioners be granted regular pay scale admissible to the post of Gram Sewak. Para 21 of the judgment dt. 31.7.2013, relevant for the purpose, reads ad infra- "In the result, the writ petitions succeed, the same are hereby allowed. The guidelines laid down by the State Government clarifying the circular dated 2.10.10, as contained in clause 3 of the order dated 23.5.11 providing for the benefits regular pay scale admissible to the post of Gram Sevak to the surplus employees of Spinfed/Cotton Complex absorbed/appointed by transfer on the post of Gram Sevak, on completion of ten years of service in terms of clause 5-Ga of circular dated 2.10.10 instead of from the date of their joining on the post in terms of clause 2 of the said circular dated 2.10.10 is held to be illegal and quashed. Consequently the resolutions adopted by the District Establishment Committee/Zila Parishads in compliance of the clarification issued by the State Government as aforesaid vide order dated 23.5.11 and the orders issued pursuant thereto, withdrawing the regular pay scale admissible to the post of Gram Sevak, already granted to the petitioners and directing recovery of the excess amount paid are also quashed. The orders issued by the Zila Parishad/Panchayat Samitees concerned extending the benefit of regular pay scale admissible to the post of Gram Sevak to the petitioners with effect from the date of their joining the duties are restored". The order of the ld. The orders issued by the Zila Parishad/Panchayat Samitees concerned extending the benefit of regular pay scale admissible to the post of Gram Sevak to the petitioners with effect from the date of their joining the duties are restored". The order of the ld. Single Judge of this Court came to be challenged by the respondent in batch of special appeals in DB Special Appeal (W) No. 1298/2014 & 12 other special appeals and such appeals were dismissed by the Division Bench of this court vide judgment dt. 10.11.2014 and this court considers appropriate to quote para 13 of the order of Division Bench which reads ad infra- "13. It is not denied that all the respondents, who are petitioners in the writ petitions, have been absorbed as Gram Sewak in the Panchayati Raj Department and are carrying on the same duties and responsibilities as regularly employed Gram Sewak. The nature of their employment, after their absorption, is not different in any manner, nor the conditions of their employment are different than those of regularly employed Gram Sewak. In the circumstances, they cannot be treated differently for payment of salary, and no artificial discrimination can be made between them on the basis of their past employment. Learned Single Judge has not committed any error in finding that para 5(gha) of the order dated 2.10.2010 is not applicable to the petitioners as they were not working in any Department or Corporation, on work charged basis." Counsel submits that order of Division Bench of this Court came to be challenged in Special Leave to Appeal before the Apex Court which came to be dismissed and upon dismissal of SLP, the matter attained finality and remain no more res integra. Counsel submits that in the case of such of the writ petitioners who approached this court, orders have been passed revising their pay scale in terms of judgment of this court and that can be further noticed from the circular issued by the respondent dt. 29.5.2014 followed with order dt. 30.9.2016 but since the petitioners have not preferred writ petition at the relevant point of time, the benefit of judgment in rem was not extended to them and that is the reason which has compelled them to file instant writ petitions. 29.5.2014 followed with order dt. 30.9.2016 but since the petitioners have not preferred writ petition at the relevant point of time, the benefit of judgment in rem was not extended to them and that is the reason which has compelled them to file instant writ petitions. This court is prima facie of the view that once there was a judgment of this court of which reference has been made and that has attained finality, it must be applicable to the employees similarly situated in rem and individual should not be compelled to approach the court by filing their writ petitions. Since this court is not examining the issue on merits as regards the present petitioners are concerned, but considers appropriate that let the petitioners may submit self contained representation keeping in view the judgment of this court to the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Tonk and the authority shall decide the representation keeping in view the principles laid down by this court and pass necessary orders within three months and if the respondent failed to pass orders within the time prescribed, the petitioners are at liberty to file application for revival of the petitions. Since the order is now to be made applicable in rem to all such employees similarly situated, let the copy of this order be sent to the Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department for necessary action and compliance. The writ petitions stand disposed of in the terms indicated above. Copy of the order be separately placed in connected file." 2. In the light of the above, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner while keeping in view the judgment in the case of Radha Krishna Bairwa (supra) within a period of 60 days.