Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt.Chandrakala vs State & Ors on 17 December, 2012
Author: Govind Mathur
Bench: Govind Mathur
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR
ORDER
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3314/2003
Smt. Chandrakala
Vs.
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
DATE OF ORDER :: 17.12.2012
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR
Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit, for the petitioner.
Mr. Sudhir Tak, Deputy Government Counsel
...
BY THE COURT :
The petitioner by way of this petition for writ is claiming directions for the respondents to allow her husband late Shri Govind Ram Bhati selection grades on completion of 18 and 27 year's of service and further to quash order dated 12.5.2003 (Annex.3) treating her husband adhoc appointee to the post of Lower Division Clerk. A prayer is also made to revise all the retiral benefits granted to her husband as well as to herself by way of awarding second and third selection grades in accordance with the Government of Rajasthan Notification dated 25.1.1992 and its subsequent notification dated 17.2.1998.
In brief, the facts of the case are that the husband of the petitioner late Shri Govind Ram (hereinafter referred to as 'government servant') entered in the service of respondents on 2 being appointed as Class-IV employee on 29.8.1964. A promotion was accorded to him as Lower Division Clerk under an order dated 29.7.1977 passed by the Principal, Dungar College, Bikaner.
While serving as Lower Division Clerk, the government servant died on 10.9.2002. His wife, the present petitioner, by submitting representation claimed for second and third selection grades on completion of 18 and 27 years of service by the government servant but the same was denied for the reasons given in communication (Annex.3) dated 12.5.2003 passed by the Joint Director, College Education, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur with assertion that the government servant did not qualify the performance test, therefore, he was not entitled for the grant of selection grades.
While challenging the decision of the respondents, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the appointment was given to the government servant by way of promotion, therefore, he was not supposed to qualify proficiency test. It is also asserted that the requirement of qualifying the test was pertaining to the adhoc appointees employed under the government orders during the period commencing from 8.11.1975 to 31.3.1980.
3
A reply to the writ petition has been filed on behalf of respondents reiterating the reasons given under the communication dated 12.5.2003.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
It is not in dispute that the government servant entered in the services of the respondents as Class-IV employee on 29.8.1964 and a promotion was accorded to him under the order dated 29.7.1977 as Lower Division Clerk. The government servant, as such, has already availed first promotion in his service. The only question remains is that whether the government servant can be treated as an adhoc appointee to the post of Lower Division Clerk that warrants clearing of performance test as prescribed under Sub-Rule 5 of Rule 25 of the Rajasthan Subordinate Offices and Ministerial Staff Rules, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1957') for regularisation of service.
Rule 7 of the Rules of 1957 provides mode of recruitment to different posts in ministerial cadre including the post of Lower Division Clerk. On the post aforesaid, an appointment can be made by way of promotion against 10% of the total vacancies determined as per Rule 9 of the Rules aforesaid. The persons appointed by way of promotion to the post of Lower Division Clerk are required to have eligibility prescribed for appointment 4 on that post by way of direct recruitment. It is not in dispute that the government servant was possessing such eligibility. So far as the condition-precedent for qualifying the proficiency test is concerned, that is applicable for the persons employed during the period from 1.4.1975 to 31.3.1980 on adhoc basis without passing competitive/ qualifying examination held by the Commission. The government servant was never appointed on adhoc, basis but was promoted against 10% vacancies reserved for Class-IV employees, as such, there was no need for him to qualify the proficiency test. Suffice it to mention here that the government servant qualified the type-test on 9.7.1978, though, that too was not required under the Rules of 1957. The respondents in view of the legal position discussed above, were wrong in treating the government servant adhoc appointee and denying promotions to the next higher post or the selection grades in lieu thereof on the count that he failed to qualify the proficiency test.
The petition for writ, therefore, deserves acceptance, hence is allowed. The decision of the respondents of to deny selection grades to the government servant in accordance with the Government of Rajasthan notification dated 25.1.1992 and the subsequent notification dated 17.2.1998 is declared bad. The respondents are directed to grant selection grades as per the notifications dated 25.1.1992 and 17.2.1998. He is further declared entitled to get all arrears of pay by making fixation after 5 granting selection grades, revision of pay-scales, revision of pension and all other post-retiral benefits corresponding to the grant of selection grades. The arrears accrued as a consequent to this order is required to be paid to the petitioner Smt. Chandrakala, widow of late government servant on or before 30.5.2013 with interest @ 6.5% per annum.
No order as to costs.
(GOVIND MATHUR), J.
Sanjay