Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 335 (RAJ)

Vikram Singh Rao v. State of Rajasthan

2020-02-06

DINESH MEHTA

body2020
JUDGMENT : Dinesh Mehta, J. 1. The present bunch of writ petitions has been preferred for the following reliefs: (i) "The respondents may kindly be directed to grant annual grade increments from the date of his appointment which has not been given to him due to not having type test. The respondents may kindly be further directed not to insist the petitioner for passing of the type test. (ii) The respondents may kindly be further directed to consider the petitioner for promotion pursuant to the seniority list issued of the LDC. (iii) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner. (iv) Writ petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed with cost." 2. Before adverting to the question involved, it would be appropriate to lay down factual backdrop of the case. 3. For the purpose of deciding these cases, the facts relating to SB Civil Writ Petition No. 17204/2019 (Vikram Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors) are being taken into consideration. 4. The petitioner applied for appointment under Rule 277 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules of 1996'), which provides for recruitment of a member of the family of deceased employee. The petitioner being found eligible and entitled was given appointment under Rule 277 of the Rules of 1996, vide order dated 22.02.2013. 5. A consequential order dated 28.02.2013, which followed petitioner's appointment order (dated 22.02.2013) aforesaid had following conditions No. 1 & 2, stringed with it:- ^^1- bUgsa fu;qfDr frfFk ls 3¼rhu½ o"kZ esa Vad.k ijh{kk Hkk"kk foHkkx ds ek/;e ls mRRkh.kZ djuh gksxh vkSj ,slk u gksus ij fu;qfDr lekIr gksus ds nkf;Rok/khu gksxhA 2- tc rd Vad.k ijh{kk mŸkh.kZ ugh dh tkrh gS rc rd dksbZ okf"kZd osru o`f} vuqKs; ugha dh tk;sxhA^^ 6. Mr. Bhaleria, learned counsel for the petitioners, at the outset submitted that the controversy involved in the present writ petitions, is squarely covered by the judgment dated 04.04.2019 rendered in the case of Mohhamad Umer Rangrej Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Mr. Bhaleria, learned counsel for the petitioners, at the outset submitted that the controversy involved in the present writ petitions, is squarely covered by the judgment dated 04.04.2019 rendered in the case of Mohhamad Umer Rangrej Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : SB Civil Writ Petition No. 10333/2017, with a small difference of facts: in the case of Mohhamad Umer Rangrej (supra), the appointment order/consequential order did not contain condition(s) of clearing type test, whereas the petitioner's appointment order/consequent order contain a stipulation of clearing a 'Type Test'. 7. Clarifying the facts aforesaid, he argued that even such distinguishing feature would not make any difference on petitioner's right, inasmuch as Rule 266 of the Rules of 1996, which provides for requisite qualification, stood amended w.e.f. 18.12.2012 and the requirement of clearing 'Type Test' has been done away with. 8. Mr. Tak, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, on the other hand, argued that the petitioner's case is not covered by adjudication made by this Court in Mohhamad Umer Rangrej (supra), inasmuch condition of clearing type test, has been accepted by the petitioner with wide eyes open. He argued that in the teeth of condition of clearing type test, the petitioner cannot claim immunity from appearing in such type test. He added that unless petitioner clears the test, as stipulated in the order dated 28.02.2013, he cannot take benefits, which are available to a regularly recruited Lower Division Clerk (LDC). 9. For the purpose of deciding the question at hands, it would be profitable to reproduce the relevant provision relating to educational qualification contained in Rule 266 prior to 18.12.2012 and which is available after 18.12.2012: "Rule 266. Academic qualifications (before amendment). - A recruit must possess minimum qualification as under:- (1) L.D.C.(85% by direct recruitment and 15% by promotion (i) Senior Secondary under new(10+2) scheme or Higher Secondary under old scheme from Rajasthan Board of Secondary Education or equivalent. (ii) Typing speed of 20 and 25 words per minute in Hindi and English typing respectively (2) V.L.W.-cum-Secretary (100% by direct recruitment) Graduate or qualification declared equivalent thereto by the Government. (ii) Typing speed of 20 and 25 words per minute in Hindi and English typing respectively (2) V.L.W.-cum-Secretary (100% by direct recruitment) Graduate or qualification declared equivalent thereto by the Government. (3) Primary School Teacher (100% by direct recruitment) (I) Senior Secondary (Academic) under new (10+2) scheme or Higher Secondary under old scheme from Rajasthan Board of Secondary Education or equivalent and Secondary School Certificate from Rajasthan Board of Secondary Education or equivalent with 5 subjects, 3 of them shall be Mathematics, English & Hindi. (ii) BSTC Course.” Rule 266. Academic qualifications (after amendment). - A recruit must possess minimum qualification as under:- (1) L.D.C. (95% by direct recruitment and 05% by promotion A. For direct recruitment (i) Senior Secondary from a recognized board or its equivalent examination, and “O” or Higher Level Certificate Course conducted by DOEACC under control of the Department of Electronics, Government of India. Or Computer Operator & Programming Assistant (COPA)/Data Preparation and Computer Software (DPCS) certificate organized under National/State Council of Vocational Training Scheme. Or Diploma in Computer Science/Computer Applications from a University established by law in India or from an institution recognized by the Government. Or Diploma in Computer Science & Engineering from a polytechnic institution recognized by the Government. Or Certificate Course in Information Technology (RSCIT) conducted by Vardhman Mahaveer Open University, Kota under control of Rajasthan Knowledge Corporation Limited. B. For promotion, Secondary from a recognized board and five year experience on the post of Class IV 10. Indisputably, after 18.12.2012 the requirement of clearing type test has been done away with and requirement of possessing computer efficiency has been introduced. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is having requisite computer proficiency certificate. 11. In considered opinion of this Court once Rule 266 of the Rules of 1996 stood amended and requirement of clearing type test was substituted by the computer proficiency, the respondents could not have appended a condition of clearing type test in the form of Conditions No. 1 & 2 of the consequential order dated 28.02.2013. 12. Rule 277 of the Rules of 1996, under which the petitioner was accorded appointment, provides that appointment to dependent of deceased employee shall be given, if such member fulfills the educational qualification prescribed for the post and is otherwise qualified for such service. 13. 12. Rule 277 of the Rules of 1996, under which the petitioner was accorded appointment, provides that appointment to dependent of deceased employee shall be given, if such member fulfills the educational qualification prescribed for the post and is otherwise qualified for such service. 13. A conjoint reading of Rules 266 and 277 of the Rules of 1996 leaves no manner of doubt that on the date of issuance of appointment order, the petitioners were required to possess the educational qualification, as were prevailing on the date of issuance of the order of appointment. 14. On 22.02.2013 the requisite educational qualification for the post of LDC was that of possessing computer proficiency as provided in Rule 266 and not 'typing'. 15. In this view of the matter, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the condition No. 1 & 2 appended in order dated 28.02.2013 is unsustainable being contrary to Rule 266; the same is, hereby, quashed. 16. It is declared that the petitioner is/was not required to qualify type test for which he is being asked for the purpose of conferring all the emoluments and benefits to which he is otherwise entitled. 17. As an upshot of discussions above, all these writ petitions are allowed. The respondents are directed to treat all these petitioners eligible for all emoluments and advantages to which a Lower Division Clerk is entitled to. The respondents are, however, free to ascertain the factum of the petitioners having requisite computer proficiency, prior to granting all the fruits of their employment. 18. Each petitioner will place a certificate of their computer proficiency, as required under Rule 266 (after 18.12.2012) along with a certified copy of the order instant before concerned Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, who shall do the needful within a period of eight weeks thereafter. 19. Stay applications and all interlocutory applications in each of the writ petitions also stand disposed of.