Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2. Shri K.N. Garg for the State is present in the Court. He is not even having the file of the case with him since it has not been ear-marked to him despite the fact that he had been associated with this Court in regular hearing cases for almost over a month. Thus, this Court has no option but to proceed with this judgment, in absence of any assistance from the respondents which shows unaccountability of the officer incharge of the case.

3. This is a writ petition by a represented body viz., Rajasthan Nagar Palika Seva Nirwat Karmchari Sangh, who are the retired employees from Municipal Services under the Government of Rajasthan. They form a class of officers, who were earlier having the benefit of contributory provident fund while they were serving in various municipalities till the date of the superannuation. With effect from 1-11-56 when Ajmer and Merwara merged with the State of Rajasthan, municipal services once again were integrated and with the repeal of Rajasthan Town Municipalities Act, 1951 and Ajmer and Merwara Municipalities Regulations, an Act known as Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 was brought into force and the unified municipal services were constituted for whole of the State and accordingly Rules were framed under the aforesaid Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1959'). Rajasthan Municipal Service Rules, 1963 were brought into force w.e.f. 28-11-63 for the State Municipal Service Employees, Rajasthan Municipal (Subordinate and Ministerial) Service Rules, 1963 was brought into force w.e.f. 24-11-63 and about Class IV employees Rajasthan Municipalities (Class IV) Service Rules, 1964 were brought into force w.e.f. 2-5-64. Thus, the services of the employees of all classes in all the Municipalities in Rajasthan were governed under the provisions of the aforesaid Rules. In the Rajasthan Municipal Service Rules, 1963, provisions were made for provident fund, pension etc. and the relevant rules are Rule 35 and Rule 36 of the Rajasthan Municipal Service Rules, 1963, which are reproduced hereinbelow:

4. Similar provisions were contained in Rules 35 and 36 of the Subordinate and Municipal Service Rules as well as Class IV Service Rules. It may be pertinent to mention here that earlier to these Rules, benefit of provident fund was extended to the employees whose salary was not less than Rs. 25/- p.m. under the provisions of the Rajasthan Town Municipalities Provident Fund Rules, 1955. Those rules were later on re-framed after the commencement of the Act of 1959 and came to be known as the Rajasthan Municipalities Provident Fund Rules, 1960. It may also be relevant to mention here that before the merger of various States into State of Rajasthan, the matter about contribution towards provident fund was governed under the various State Rules such as Ajmer Merwara Provident Fund Rules, 1937, Bikaner Provident Fund Rules, Udaipur Provident Fund Rules, Jodhpur Government Service Regulation so on and so forth and to bring parity the State once again thought it proper to make Rajasthan Municipalities (Contributory Fund and Gratuity) Rules, 1969 which were brought into force w.e.f. 2nd August, 1970 and with the commencement of these Rules, the Rajasthan Municipalities Provident Fund Rules, 1960, as quoted above, were repelled. By these rules of 1969, uniformity among the employees of all types of Municipalities were sought to be enforced and an option was given to the employees of the erstwhile States to elect the Rules of 1969 as contemplated under Rule 4 of the Rules of 1969. It may be observed here that in order to have some rationality and bringing uniformity in the matter of service besides the Rajasthan Municipalities (Contributory Provident Fund and Gratuity) Rules, 1969 several other rules were brought into force such as Conveyance allowance Order No. 24 (43) LSG/61 dated 30-8-62, The Rajasthan Municipalities (Supply of Liveries to Employees) Rules, 1963, The Rajasthan Municipalities (Observance of Holidays and Regulating Hours of Work) Rules, 1961, Hard Duty Allowance to fire Staff No. Est/(5) F. 18 (E) (59))/68/30589-949 dated 3-10-70, Staffing Pattern for Municipal Boards F. 24 (2) DLB/64-65/42554 dated 27/28-12-65, Staffing Pattern for Municipal Councils F. 24 (2) Integ. DLB/66/578-822 dated 31-10-66 and F. 24 (24) Integ. DLB/66/4044 dated 6-2-67 and Payment of House Rent Allowance Rules. On 17-9-87 a Gazette Notification in respect of an order purported to have been passed on 26-5-84 came to be passed whereby the employees of the Ajmer, Merwara Municipalities appointed/retired prior to 2-8-70 were granted pensionary benefits as indicated in the order. This notification has created three classes amongst the municipal employees of Ajmer State it self employees who had been appointed before 1-11-56, employees who have been appointed between 1-11-56 and 1-8-70 and those appointed after 1-8-70. A protest was lodged against the aforesaid notification as the action of the State Government was discriminatory between different employees of the Municipalities but the State Government did not pay any attention.

5. The grievance of the petitioner association is that the employees who were in service of the Municipalities in State of Rajasthan other than the Municipalities under Ajmer Merwara have been treated differently. Not only that, the employees from the erstwhile Ajmer State themselves have been divided into three categories and there is inter se discrimination also. The grievance is that both the sets of employees i.e., employees coming from Ajmer Merwara and the United State of Rajasthan, all had been, by earlier Rule, subjected to a similar treatment and the Rules covered service matters and service prospects. Thus, there is no lawful justification in denying the pensionary benefits to the members of the petitioner association if the same had been extended to the employees of the erstwhile Ajmer Merwara Municipalities. The contention of the petitioner is that the Provident Fund facilities were available not only to the employees of the Ajmer Merwara but in other State also and, therefore, the treatment which has been meted out to the employees of the erstwhile Ajmer Merwara Municipalities, should be extended to the members of the association, whose list is given in Schedule-A. Regarding denial of the pensionary benefits to the members of the petitioner association, a letter was addressed to the Chairman and Administrator by the Dy. Secretary of the Local Self Government on 9-9-88 followed by a telegram and a letter of the Director, Local Bodies. To raise a protest, the petitioner association filed a representation on 26-10-88 but having not got any relief from the respondents, this writ petition has been filed.

9. Sections 303 to 306 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 provide for creation and constitution of the service while Section 297 enables the State Government to make rules in that behalf. From time to time, various rules have been framed and the purpose of successively passing the service rules was to remove discrimination between the employees coming from one State or the other. The history of the integration of the State including that of Ajmer Merwara gave rise to repeatedly passing the rules one after another and they had been made in order to bring uniformity and to have integration of service. When the Provident Fund Rules, 1969 were framed, there was a complete integration of the service and all the employees were governed under the Rules. By passing the order dated 26-5-84, the State Government placed the employees of the Ajmer Municipalities at a different pedestal more or less, those who were subscribers of the contributory provident fund and they were extended the benefit of the pension scheme. However, after promulgation of Rajasthan Municipal Service Rules, 1963, Rajasthan Municipal (Subordinate and Ministerial Service) Rules, 1963 and Rajasthan Municipal (Class IV) Service Rules, 1964 the employees of the Municipalities including the employees of the erstwhile Ajmer Merwara State became one class, this Merwara naturally similarly situated and no discrimination could be made qua Ajmer Merwara employees as throughout the Rajasthan including the employees of Ajmer Municipalities, who belong to CPF Scheme. Therefore, ex-facie, in absence of any explanation, it appears that once the benefit has been extended to the erstwhile Ajmer State employees, it was also required to be extended to similarly situated other employees, who too are entitled to pension. Like adding insult to the injury, the employees have been further discriminated by passing yet another order dated 9-9-88 by which pension benefits had been extended to all the employees w.e.f. 1-10-87 and the employees, who had been retired prior to this date have been totally ignored. The result of this is that employees of the Ajmer State being covered by order dated 26-5-84 are benefited and those who have retired after 1-10-87 have also been benefited and only small number of persons, who are forming the members of the association stand discrimination.