Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Ramgopal Vijay Son Of Late Shri Sita Ram ... vs The Rajasthan High Court on 19 October, 2024
Author: Pankaj Bhandari
Bench: Pankaj Bhandari, Shubha Mehta
[2024:RJ-JP:21806-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20910/2018
1. Rajesh Agrawal, Son Of Late Shri Dau Dass Agrawal, Aged
About 43 Years, Resident Of Iv/a/15, Government
Multistoried Flats, Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur-302015
(Rajasthan)
2. Dushyant Trivedi, Son Of Shri Ratan Lal Trivedi, Aged
About 46 Years, Resident Of Brahampuri, Hazari
Chabutra, Chandpole, Jodhpur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The Rajasthan High Court, Through Its Registrar General,
Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur.
2. The State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary
(Law), Law And Legal Affairs Department, Government Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary
(Finance), Department Of Finance, Government Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
----Respondents
Connected With
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20912/2018
Ramgopal Vijay Son Of Late Shri Sita Ram Vijay, Aged About 55
Years, 44-G-2, Tagore Nagar, Near Kartarpura Phatak, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The Rajasthan High Court, Through Its Registrar General,
Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur.
2. The State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary
(Law), Law And Legal Affairs Department, Government Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary
(Finance), Department Of Finance, Government Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
----Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20913/2018
(Downloaded on 19/10/2024 at 11:54:23 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:21806-DB] (2 of 13) [CW-20910/2018]
Mohd. Farooque, Son Of Shri Habibur Rehman, Aged About 56
Years, Resident Of 46-Ka-5, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The Rajasthan High Court, Through Its Registrar General,
Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur.
2. The State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary
(Law), Law And Legal Affairs Department, Government Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary
(Finance), Department Of Finance, Government Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anuroop Singhi with
Mr. Aditya Khandelwal
Mr. Abhishek Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajendra Prasad, AG, assisted by
Mr. Darsh Pareek,
Ms. Dhriti Laddha
Ms. Harshita Thakral &
Mr. Sheetanshu Sharma
Mr. Shailesh Prakash Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA
Order
RESERVED ON :: 18/04/2024
PRONOUNCED ON :: 23/05/2024
(Per. Pankaj Bhandari, J)
1. Since controversy involved in these writ petitions is
common, the same are being decided by this order.
2. The petitioners have preferred these writ petitions inter-alia
praying for the following reliefs:-
"(i) the Hon'ble High Court may kindly declare the
Clause-6 of Part-I of the Rules of 2002 to be
ultravires and unconstitutional and same may kindly
(Downloaded on 19/10/2024 at 11:54:23 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:21806-DB] (3 of 13) [CW-20910/2018]
be struck down to the extent of treating the post of
Computer Informer as a feeder post for appointment
on the post of Senior Judicial Assistant.
(ii) the Hon'ble High Court may kindly direct the
respondent to open the avenues for promotion in the
Technical Cadre for the employees working in the
Technical Wing (Computer) of the Rajasthan High
Court instead of promoting them into the Non-
Technical Cadre.
(iii) the Hon'ble High Court may kindly direct the
respondent to convert the post of Programmer into a
promotional post for the employees of the Technical
wing (computer) who are working on the post of
Computer Informer including the petitioners.
(iv) the Hon'ble High Court may kindly direct the
respondent to prepare the interse seniority even at
the level of the post of Informatics Assistant
alongwith the employees who are working on the
equivalent post in the non-technical wing.
(v) the Hon'ble High Court may direct the
respondent assign the proper seniority to the
petitioners in comparison to the employees who are
much junior to him in the non-technical wing and on
the basis of that only he be extended promotion on
the further higher posts.
(vi) the Hon'ble High Court may direct respondent
to consider the case of petitioners for promotion on
the post of Administrative Officer Judicial (AOJ) in
place of Senior Judicial Assistant as the said post of
AOJ bears the proper grade pay of Rs.4800/- on
which the petitioners ought to have been promoted.
(vii) any other appropriate order or direction,
which this Hon'ble Court, may deem just and proper
in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also
kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners."
3. Succinctly stated the facts of these petitions are that vide
notification dated 02.06.1997, an amendment was made in the
Rajasthan High Court (Conditions of Service of Staff) Rules, 1953,
whereby for the first time the post of 'Data Entry Operator' was
introduced under the head of 'Technical Post'. The respondent -
High Court invited applications for appointment on 6 posts of 'Data
Entry Operator' by direct recruitment vide notification dated
10.02.1998. The petitioners applied for the said post and were
(Downloaded on 19/10/2024 at 11:54:23 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:21806-DB] (4 of 13) [CW-20910/2018]
extended appointment vide order dated 21.01.1999. By a further
amendment in the Rules of 1997, the Rajasthan High Court Staff
Service Rules, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of
2002') came into force, according to which, another post of
'Computer Informer' was introduced to the Technical Wing, which
was initially a direct recruitment post, but later on, the same was
made to be the promotional post from the feeder post of 'Data
Entry Operator'. Vide notification dated 08.07.2011, the
nomenclature of the post of 'Data Entry Operator' was changed to
'Informatics Assistant' by the High Court. Grade Pay of Data Entry
Operator i.e. 'Informatics Assistant' is Rs.2800/- and that of
'Computer Informer' is Rs.3600/-, which is higher than the Grade
Pay of 'Judicial Assistant'. The petitioners, who were holding the
post of 'Computer Informer' claimed promotion to the post bearing
Grade Pay of Rs.4800/-, but they were promoted to the post of
'Senior Judicial Assistant', which is having the Grade Pay of
Rs.4200/-. For the sake of clarity, a flow chart is reproduced
hereunder:-
Pay Band Grade Pay State Govt. RHC Non- State Govt. RHC
Non- Technical Technical Technical
Technical
5200-20200 2400 LDC JJA --- ---
(PB-1)
5200-20200 2800 UDC JA Informatics Informatics
(PB-1) Assistant Assistant
9300-34800 3600 Assistant Computer
(PB-2) Programmer Informer
9300-34800 4200 OA SJA
(PB-2)
9300-34800 4800 Admn. Officer Admn. Programmer
(PB-2) Officer
Judicial
4. It is contended by learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners that the petitioners were working on the Technical Post
(Downloaded on 19/10/2024 at 11:54:23 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:21806-DB] (5 of 13) [CW-20910/2018]
and transfer from the Technical Wing to the Non-Technical Wing is
contrary to the mandate of the Rules of 2002. It is contended by
Mr. Anuroop Singhi, Advocate, appearing for the petitioners that
under the Rules, it was specifically provided in Rule 7 that subject
to these rules, the rules and orders for the time being in force and
applicable to the servants of corresponding classes in the service
of the Government of Rajasthan shall regulate the conditions of
service of persons serving on the staff of the High Court. It is
argued that High Court vide order dated 17.11.2015 created the
post of 'Programmer', however, the post was to be filled by Direct
Recruitment only whereas, under the Rajasthan Computer State
and Subordinate Services Rules, 1992, the post of 'Programmer' is
to be filled 60% by Direct Recruitment and 40% by Promotion and
the promotion is to be made from the post of 'Computer Operator'
having 5 years service as Computer Operator.
5. It is contended that under the service of State Government,
a person on the technical post of 'Computer Informer' is eligible to
be promoted as 'Programmer' whereas, under the service of the
Rajasthan High Court, a 'Computer Informer' has no promotional
post and he/she is being promoted from technical wing to non-
technical side on the post of 'Senior Judicial Assistant'. It is argued
that a Junior Judicial Assistant having grade pay of Rs.2800/- is
promoted to the post of Senior Judicial Assistant having grade pay
of Rs.4200/- whereas, the petitioners, who were 'Computer
Informer', were in the grade pay of Rs.3600/- and they ought to
have been promoted to the post of Administrative Officer Judicial
(A.O.J.) having grade pay of Rs.4800/-.
(Downloaded on 19/10/2024 at 11:54:23 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:21806-DB] (6 of 13) [CW-20910/2018]
6. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that
the petitioners were appointed in the year 2019. The persons, who
were appointed on the post of Junior Judicial Assistant, got
promotions prior to the petitioners and have reached to higher
position than that of the petitioners, whereas if date of joining is
to be considered, petitioners ought to be given promotion in the
grade pay of Rs.4800/-. It is also contended that inter-se seniority
should have been prepared from the very beginning i.e. from the
post of Informatics Assistant and Judicial Assistant and as the
same has not been done, persons who were appointed after the
petitioners, are holding higher post than them. It is contended
that the next promotional post provided under the State
Government to the post of 'Computer Informer', is of
'Programmer'.
7. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that
the employees, who are working in a particular wing, should have
promotional avenues in its own category and the respondents
cannot change the category from technical to non-technical by
promoting the petitioners in the non-technical wing. It is also
contended that the post of Programmer was included in the
Schedule, but it was made a post of direct recruitment. It is
further contended that the petitioners are required to be
considered for the post of Administrative Officer Judicial in place of
Senior Judicial Assistant as the post of 'Administrative Officer
Judicial' bears the grade pay of Rs.4800/-, on which the
petitioners ought to have been promoted.
(Downloaded on 19/10/2024 at 11:54:23 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:21806-DB] (7 of 13) [CW-20910/2018]
8. Mr. Rajendra Prasad, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Darsh
Pareek, Advocate, appearing for the respondents has opposed the
writ petitions. It is contended that the petitioners were appointed
in pursuance of the advertisement issued by the High Court in
1998 on the post of 'Data Entry Operator'. It is also contended
that the petitioners cannot claim parity with the Junior Judicial
Assistant as petitioners opted appointment in the technical wing.
In reply, the respondents have stated that the petitioners were
promoted to the post of 'Computer Informer' and since there was
no further promotional avenues, a promotional avenue was
provided and from Computer Informer, the post of Senior Judicial
Assistant and thereafter, post of Administrative Officer Judicial
were included. Thus, since the posts of Data Entry Operator and
Computer Informer were technical posts and it was a dying cadre,
to give benefit to the employees, the Committee resolved to
provide promotional avenue from Computer Informer to Senior
Judicial Assistant and thereafter, to Administrative Officer Judicial.
It is mentioned in the reply that the petitioners cannot claim parity
with the Junior Judicial Assistant and since the petitioners were in
a dying cadre, they were given promotional avenue and the Rules
of 2002 cannot be struck down as it is in accordance with the
Constitution.
9. In the reply, it is also mentioned that the petitioners were
not having the minimum requisite qualification for appointment on
the post created by the High Court and therefore, since they were
in dying cadre, promotional avenues were provided in the non-
technical wing. In the reply, it is further mentioned that the
(Downloaded on 19/10/2024 at 11:54:23 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:21806-DB] (8 of 13) [CW-20910/2018]
representations given by the petitioners were placed before the
Committee and the Committee resolved that since petitioners are
not having the minimum required qualification for the technical
post of 'Programmer' and promotional avenues are not available in
the technical cadre in the establishment of the Rajasthan High
Court, they were provided promotional channel of 'Senior Judicial
Assistant' and onwards.
10. We have considered the contentions.
11. At the outset, we ought to observe that the petitioners
applied for the post of Data Entry Operator, which was later on
converted to 'Informatics Assistant'. It is true that the persons
posted on the post of Junior Judicial Assistant got promotion at a
much faster pace than the petitioners, who had applied in the
technical post. The post of 'Programmer' was inserted at Clause-
29 in Part-5 of the Rules of 2002, but it was shown to be filled by
way of direct recruitment.
12. In the reply, it is revealed that the petitioners are not having
the requisite qualification seeking appointment on the post of
Programmer. Since the technical post on which the petitioners
took appointment was a dying cadre, the High Court, considering
the representations of the petitioners, came to the conclusion that
the petitioners are not having promotional avenues and therefore,
they were provided promotional avenues in the non-technical
wing. From the chart produced by the petitioners, it is evident that
in the State Government, there is a post of 'Informatics Assistant'
carrying grade pay of Rs.2800/-, which is the same in Rajasthan
(Downloaded on 19/10/2024 at 11:54:23 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:21806-DB] (9 of 13) [CW-20910/2018]
High Court's technical wing i.e. Informatics Assistant having grade
pay of Rs.2800/-. In the State Government, a person promoted
from the post of Informatics Assistant is 'Assistant Programmer',
whereas in the Rajasthan High Court, it is 'Computer Informer'. In
the State Government, an Assistant Programmer is having a grade
pay of Rs.3600/-, he is promoted directly as a Programmer having
grade pay of Rs.4800/-, whereas since there was no promotional
avenue for the post of Programmer, a 'Computer Informer' was
provided promotional avenue as 'Senior Judicial Assistant' with
grade pay of Rs.4200/- and thereafter, he was entitled to be
promoted as Administrative Officer Judicial with grade pay of
Rs.4800/-.
13. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is
that Junior Judicial Assistant having grade pay of Rs.2800/- is
promoted directly as Senior Judicial Assistant whereas, in the
technical wing, an Informatics Assistant is first promoted to the
post of Computer Informer and then he is promoted as Senior
Judicial Assistant. Thus, there is a marked difference. A Junior
Judicial Assistant having grade pay of Rs.2800/- gets promotion to
the post of Senior Judicial Assistant having grade pay of Rs.4200/-
whereas a Computer Informer in the technical wing having grade
pay of Rs.3600/- gets promotion to the post of Senior Judicial
Assistant, which is having a grade pay of Rs.4200/-.
14. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that
where the Rule is silent, the Rule as prevalent in the State
Government would apply and therefore, there has to be a
(Downloaded on 19/10/2024 at 11:54:24 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:21806-DB] (10 of 13) [CW-20910/2018]
promotional post as is available in the State Services. We are not
inclined to accept the said argument for the very reason that Rule
7 of the Rules clearly specifies 'subject to these Rules', meaning
thereby that if the Rule does not provide for reservation for
promotion, then Rule of the State would not apply. It is evident
that the Schedule does not have a promotional post, in case of the
posts, which the petitioners were holding. For a post to be there in
the Service Cadre, permission of the State is required at
appropriate level and unless a post is sanctioned by the State, no
promotion can be made to such non-existent post. Since the Rules
of the High Court did not provide for any promotional avenues in
the technical wing, High Court on the administrative side thought
it proper to give a promotional avenue and the employees of the
technical wing were given promotional benefit in the non-technical
wing.
15. We are not impressed by the above arguments for the very
reason that if the technical wing in which the petitioners were
holding the post is a dying cadre, the High Court did the best it
could have for the employees, by providing them promotional
avenues. A Computer Informer, who is having grade pay of
Rs.3600/- is being given promotion as Senior Judicial Assistant
with the grade pay of Rs.4200/-. The prayer that they should be
given the post of Administrative Officer Judicial with the grade pay
of Rs.4800/- cannot be accepted for the very reason that in the
Rajasthan High Court also, there is a post of Programmer, but the
same is by way of direct recruitment and the petitioners are not
having the minimum requisite qualification for being appointed as
(Downloaded on 19/10/2024 at 11:54:24 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:21806-DB] (11 of 13) [CW-20910/2018]
Programmer. Thus, their prayer that the post of Programmer
should be made a promotional post and should not be 100% by
direct recruitment, cannot be accepted for the very reason that
the petitioners are not having the minimum requisite qualification
for being appointment on the post of Programmer. So, even if the
same promotional avenues would have been provided for the post
of Computer Informer, the petitioners would not have qualified for
the same.
16. The contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners
that the persons, who were appointed as Junior Judicial Assistant after the petitioners have got promotion to the post of Senior Judicial Assistant and Administrative Officer Judicial prior to the petitioners and thus, the petitioners are also entitled to be promoted as Administrative Officer Judicial, cannot be accepted for the very reason that the persons who have been promoted, have not been impleaded as party and if any promotion is given to the petitioners, the same would disturb the seniority list and the same cannot be disturbed by the Court in writ jurisdiction without affording opportunity of hearing to those who will be affected. As per the Rules of 2002, promotional channel of Junior Judicial Assistant and Informatics Assistant is as follows:-
"A Junior Judicial Assistant, whose grade pay of Rs.2400/- gets promotion to the post of Judicial Assistant grade pay of Rs.2800/- and thereafter he gets post by promotion as Senior Judicial Assistant having grade pay of Rs.4200/-. Thereafter, he has promotional avenues as Administrative Officer Judicial with grade pay of Rs.4800/-, however, in the technical (Downloaded on 19/10/2024 at 11:54:24 PM) [2024:RJ-JP:21806-DB] (12 of 13) [CW-20910/2018] wing, Informatics Assistant, who are appointed by the direct recruitment, are appointed in the grade pay of Rs.2800/-. They are then promoted to the post of Computer Informer grade pay of Rs.3600/- and thereafter, they joined the same stream as that of non-technical wing i.e. they got promotion to the post of Senior Judicial Assistant with the grade pay of Rs.4200/- and thereafter, they are entitled to promotion on the post of Administrative Officer Judicial grade pay of Rs.4800/-."
17. We are of the considered view that no illegality is pointed out in the Rules of 2002 framed by the High Court. Since the petitioners were appointed in technical wing and it was not having promotional avenues and the petitioners were not having the minimum requisite qualification for the post of 'Computer Programmer', the High Court, to provide benefit to its employees i.e. present petitioners, has given them promotion to the post of 'Senior Judicial Assistant'. We are also of the considered view that since both technical as well as non-technical wings, are separate wings and have separate promotional avenues, the petitioners cannot claim parity with Junior Judicial Assistant and since they were not having the minimum requisite qualification for the post of Programmer, they have been given benefit by the High Court by providing promotional avenues in the non-technical wing. Thus, no ground is made out for quashing of the Rules, as the said Rules cannot be said to be ultra-vires the Constitution. Further, if the Rule is set aside, the same would be to the disadvantage of the petitioners as if the Rule is set aside, they would continue to remain on the post of 'Computer Informer' and being a dying (Downloaded on 19/10/2024 at 11:54:24 PM) [2024:RJ-JP:21806-DB] (13 of 13) [CW-20910/2018] cadre, would retire from the post of 'Computer Informer'. Prayer sought for in the writ petitions cannot be awarded to the petitioners. The petitioners have not impleaded the persons, who were appointed on the post of Junior Judicial Assistant and thus, their seniority cannot be disturbed.
18. In view of the above, since the relief prayed for in the writ petitions cannot be granted to the petitioners and the writ petitions being devoid of any merits, the same deserves to be and are, accordingly, dismissed. However, the costs are made easy.
19. Pending Application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
20. A copy of this order be placed in each connected file.
(SHUBHA MEHTA),J (PANKAJ BHANDARI),J
SUNIL SOLANKI /PS
(Downloaded on 19/10/2024 at 11:54:24 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)