Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
The State Of Rajasthan & Ors. vs Tara Chand & Ors. on 2 September, 2015
1
D.B.Civil Special Appeal No.1209/2013
The State of Rajasthan & ors. V/s Tara Chand & ors.
2.9.2015
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.AJIT SINGH
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR
Mr.N.K.Mehta, Addl.Govt.Counsel for the appellants. Mr.Harish Purohit for the respondent.
This intra-court appeal is directed against the order dated 16.4.2013 passed by the learned Single Judge of this High Court, whereby he has allowed the respondent's S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.9810/2012.
By the order under challenge, the appellants have been directed to confer semi-permanent status to the petitioners as Store Munshi from the date they completed two years of service from the date of their appointment.
According to the appellants, they are atleast entitled to screen the service record of respondents whether they were actually appointed as Store Munshi.
Similar plea was taken by the appellants in another D.B.Civil Special Appeal (W) No.546/2014 State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Anil Acharya, which the Coordinate Bench disposed of on 20.11.2014, with the following directions:-
"20. We find that since the exercise of screening and to weed out those persons, who were not entitled to the benefits as have been given in Hem Singh's case, has already been initiated and that the list of eligible persons, after screening, has already been forwarded to the State Government, it is not necessary for this Court to examine each and every case for his/their entitlement to the benefits to be given in accordance with judgment of Hem Singh.
21. We make it clear that Hem Singh's case was decided on the findings that the petitioners in those cases were either employed initially on the post of Store Munshi in Work Charge Establishment of Public Health & Engineering Department or they were allowed to work subsequently as Store Munshi and that they were entitled to be granted semi permanent status after completing two years of 2 service and permanent status after completing 10 years of service. On the facts, as they were given in Hem Singh's case, it was decided that all such persons were entitled to consequential benefits of working on the post of Store Munshi. The benefits, however, had to be given from the date, they were working as Store Munshi and for which, they should be eligible and have not received any promotion in their field, such as Pump Driver or Fitter.
22. Now since the screening is in process and the report of the Screening Committee is under consideration of the State government, we do not propose to examine each and every case for ascertaining the facts as to whether the respondents are entitled to be given benefits and whether they will be entitled to any arrears. Any decision taken by the State Government will abide by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme court in the Special Leave to Appeal, in which, notices have been confined to payment of arrears prior to 2007 or of any orders, which the Supreme Court, pass on an application, which the State Government proposes to move.
23. We are informed that the Work Charge Rules of 1964 have, since, been repealed and that the Work Charge Establishments have been abolished, and thus, the State Government must, find out the corresponding employment and pay scales to be applicable to Store Munshi, in which the respondents, if they are entitled and eligible after screening, may be absorbed or regularised, in terms of the judgment of Hem Singh's case.
24. On the aforesaid discussion, all these special appeals are disposed of with directions that the respondents will be entitled to the benefit of Division Bench judgment in Hem Singh's case, only after and subject to the Screening to be carried out for weeding out the persons, who were either not eligible or have received promotions in their own trade other than the trade of Store Munshi. It goes without saying that this judgment will be subject to the judgment of Hon'ble Surpeme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.18046/2012. There shall be no orders as to costs."
Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection if the present appeal is also finally disposed of in terms of the above quoted directions.
We accordingly finally dispose of the writ appeal in terms of the above quoted directions. The impugned order stands modified accordingly.
(NIRMALJIT KAUR), J. (AJIT SINGH), Actg.CJ. 3 Parmar