Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
The Learned Single Judge Placing ... vs State Of Rajasthan & Ors on 11 May, 2015
Author: Ajay Rastogi
Bench: Ajay Rastogi
In The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench, Jaipur O R D E R D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.2605/2011 Date : 11/05/2015 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.K. Ranka Dr. A.S. Khangarot Adv., for appellant. Mr. Mahendra Sharma Adv., for respondent.
Instant appeal has been preferred against order of the learned Single Judge dt.18.07.2011 and the controversy which arose & considered is as to what will be the effect if an employee has been punished with the minor penalty of censure or stoppage of increment without cumulative effect of schedule of penalties provided u/R 14 of the CCA Rules,1958 while being considered for promotion on the basis of seniority cum merit or for grant of selection scale on completion of 9-18-27 years of service pursuant to circular of the Finance Department dt.25.01.1992.
The learned Single Judge placing reliance upon judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Ram Khilari Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.470/2007 allowed the writ petition preferred by the writ petitioner and observed that penalty of censure shall not come in way while the employee is being considered for promotion when it is based on seniority cum merit.
Counsel for appellant submits that what has been observed by the learned Single Judge relying upon judgment of the Division Bench (supra) does not hold good in light of judgment of the Apex Court in State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Shankar Lal Parmar, AIR 2012 SC 1913 and submits that once the employee has been punished with penalty it becomes a part of his service record & while adjudging overall suitability can always be looked into for the purpose of promotion when it is based on seniority-cum-merit or since the criteria for selection is also the same as contemplated in the circular dt.25.01.1992 that being part of service record will certainly be considered while adjudging overall suitability.
20. It is settled principle of law that like should be treated alike. This is the mandate and command of Article 14 of the Constitution, which we are required to follow. In any case, those who have earned censure cannot be treated at par with those who have had a clean service record. As mentioned hereinabove, an employee with blemished, polluted, tainted, unclean service record cannot be equated with other employee who has enjoyed clean, unblemished, unpolluted, untainted and impeccable service record. Such differentiation would not be violative of Article 14 while dealing with the principles of equality.
Counsel for respondent has tried to persuade this Court that consideration for promotion & selection scale is based on different criteria while adjudging overall suitability and the present judgment relied upon is limited only for grant of selection scale if the employee has been punished with penalty & not in relation to promotion.
The submission made is of no substance for the reason that the controversy is as to whether the employee who has been punished with the penalty provided under the schedule of penalties u/R 14 of the CCA Rules,1958 which is part of his service record what will be its effect if being considered for promotion or for grant of selection scale and in light of judgment of the Apex Court (supra) while adjudging overall suitability if he has been punished being part of service record can always be considered & adjudged his overall suitability and in light of judgment of the Apex Court (supra) the order of the learned Single Judge does not hold good & deserves to be quashed and set aside.
Consequently, the appeal succeeds & is hereby allowed and the order of the learned Single Judge impugned herein dt.18.07.2011 is quashed & set aside. No costs.
(J.K. Ranka), J. (Ajay Rastogi),J. VS/ Certificate - All corrections have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed/Vijay Singh Shekhawat/PAJW