Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 2017 (RAJ)

Yuvraj Didel v. Registrar Co-operative Societies

2022-07-13

REKHA BORANA

body2022
JUDGMENT Rekha Borana, J. - The present petitions have been filed with the prayer to fix the basic salary of the petitioners according to the prevailing provisions under Rule 26-A of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 and for grant of further consequential benefits. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the judgment passed in S.B.C.W.P. No. 6996/2014 (Amar Singh v. The Jalore Central Cooperative bank Ltd. v. Anr.) decided on 17.10.2016 and further affirmed by the Division Bench in D.B.S.A.W. No. 433/2017 (The Jalore Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Amar Singh & Anr.) decided on 18.07.2017. In Amar Singh's case (supra) it was held as under: "As a consequence of the discussion made herein above, I am of the firm opinion that the action of the respondent bank in treating the petitioners' appointment on the post of Loan Supervisors to be by way of direct recruitment rather than by way of promotion from the cadre of PACS Manager is totally unjust, illegal and contrary to the statutory orders governing the selections. This Court has no hesitation in holding that the petitioners' selection as Loan Supervisors in the Bank was definitely by way of promotion. Now coming to the second aspect of the matter i.e. the claim of the petitioners for being granted higher pay scale as compared to what they were drawing as PACS Managers. Suffice it to say that as per principles of administrative law, promotion without consequent upgradation in salary is incomprehensible. Admittedly, pay scales admissible to Loan Supervisors upon promotion from the post of PACS Managers are not stipulated in the statutory orders. Thus, indisputably, their pay scales upon promotion are required to be governed by Rule 26A of RSR" 3. It was further observed in Amar Singh's case (supra) as under: "As a consequence of the above discussion, the writ petitions are allowed. The respondents are directed to upgrade the basic pay of the petitioners in accordance with Rule 26A of the RSR by applying the said rule in letter and spirit. The petitioners shall also be entitled to consequential monetary benefits flowing from the above direction. The entire exercise as directed above shall be completed within a period of six months, failing which the accrued amount shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum." 4. The petitioners shall also be entitled to consequential monetary benefits flowing from the above direction. The entire exercise as directed above shall be completed within a period of six months, failing which the accrued amount shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum." 4. Learned counsel for the respondents conceded to the finding so far as the promotion of the candidates from the post of Managers PACS to Loan Supervisors is considered to be a promotion and not a direct recruitment. However, he submitted that so far as the second issue is concerned, as the present Bank has not adopted the Rajasthan Service Rules, the said ratio as laid down in Amar Singh's case (supra) pertaining to the promotions would not apply to the present petitioners. 5. I have gone through the judgments as passed in Amar Singh's case (supra). In the same, the issue-"Whether in absence of any statutory order, the RSR would apply or not?" has been specifically considered and dealt with and it had been specifically held as under: "Admittedly, pay scales admissible to Loan Supervisors upon promotion from the post of PACS Managers are not stipulated in the statutory orders. Thus, indisputably, their pay scales upon promotion are required to be governed by Rule 26A of RSR" 6. In view of the specific finding in Amar Singh's case (supra), this Court is of the clear opinion that the said issue was raised, considered, dealt with and decided in the said matter therefore, the same issue cannot be considered again by this Court as Amar Singh's judgment has already been affirmed by the Division Bench. 7. In view of the above observations, the present writ petitions are allowed. The respondents are directed to upgrade the basic pay of the petitioners in terms of the provisions of Rule 26-A of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951. All the consequential benefits would follow. 8. The respondents are directed to comply with the order within a period of four weeks from the date of this order. 9. All the pending applications also stand disposed of.