Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Suresh Kumar Keer S/O Shri Mohal Lal Keer vs State Of Rajasthan on 10 July, 2019
Bench: Mohammad Rafiq, Narendra Singh Dhaddha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11690/2019
1. Suresh Kumar Keer S/o Shri Mohal Lal Keer, Aged About
39 Years, R/o Village And Post Pipli Acharyan, Tehsil
Rajsamand, District Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
2. Rakesh Kumar Sen S/o Shri Dhani Ram Sen, Aged About
37 Years, R/o Village Koyad, Post Kankroli, District
Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
3. Pinki Sen D/o Shri Dhani Ram Sen, Aged About 39 Years,
R/o Village Koyad, Post Kankroli, District Rajsamand,
Rajasthan.
4. Imran Khan Gauri S/o Jamalu Deen Gauri, Aged About 41
Years, R/o Village Indroka Ki Dhani, Post Sardar Samand,
Via Pali, District Pali, Rajasthan.
5. Kishan Lal Teli S/o Shri Nana Lal Teli, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Village Govindpura, Mukam Post Mohi, District
Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
6. Pankaj Tailor S/o Shri Raj Mal Tailor, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Post Mohi, Tehsil And District Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
7. Ramji Lal Yadav S/o Shri Narain Yadav, Aged About 36
Years, R/o Dhani Choda Bina Ki, Village Paroda, Post
Mandushya, Via Ajitgarh, Tehsil Shrimadhopur, District
Sikar, Rajasthan.
8. Nirbhey Singh S/o Shri Jalbir Singh, Aged About 45 Years,
R/o Village And Post Naam, Tehsil Nadbai, District
Bharatpur, Rajasthan.
9. Rinku Bala Acharya D/o Shri Harnaryan Ji Acharya, Aged
About 33 Years, R/o Village And Post Pipli Acharyan,
Tehsil Rajsamand, District Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
10. Suresh Chandra Kumawat S/o Shri Banshi Lal Kumawat,
Aged About 39 Years, R/o Tejal Choraya, Station Raod,
Dhoinda, District Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
11. Hemant Kumar Khatik S/o Shri Mohan Lal Khatik, Aged
About 36 Years, R/o Village And Post Kuraj, Tehsil
Railmagra, District Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
12. Prakash Tak S/o Shri Sitaram Tak, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Post Mohi, Tehsil And District Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
13. Radha Kumari Regar W/o Shri Mahesh Chandra Regar,
(Downloaded on 11/07/2019 at 11:10:34 PM)
(2 of 6) [CW-11690/2019]
Aged About 35 Years, R/o Post Mohi, Tehsil And District
Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
14. Mahesh Chandra Regar S/o Shri Dal Chand Regar, Aged
About 40 Years, R/o Post Mohi, Tehsil And District
Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
15. Sanjay Kumar Saini S/o Shri Prabhati Lal Saini, Aged
About 43 Years, R/o Near Laxminarayan Mandir, Saloni
Palace, Post Kuraj, Tehsil Railmagra, District Rajsamand,
Rajasthan.
16. Yojana D/o Shri Mahendra, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
Phojadar House, Kherli Road, Nagar, District Bharatpur,
Rajasthan.
17. Hinglaj Dan Charan S/o Shri Ram Dan Charan, Aged
About 41 Years, R/o Plot No. 75, Dattatra Nagar, Gudli
Road, Kankroli, District Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
18. Bhagwati Lal Menaria S/o Shri Tek Chand, Aged About 52
Years, R/o Village And Post Gawardi, Block Railmagra,
District Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
19. Jaya Bhagora D/o Shri Jagannath Bhagora, Aged About
34 Years, R/o Mukam Post Ganeshpur, Tehsil Aspur,
District Dungerpur, Rajasthan.
20. Hurji Charpota S/o Shri Hingji Charpota, Aged About 44
Years, R/o Village Maska Chota, Post Maska Mahuri, Tehsil
Sajjangarh, District Banswara, Rajasthan.
21. Santosh Kumari D/o Shri Kanhaiya Lal, Aged About 35
Years, R/o 263/208, Pratap Nagar, Sector-26, Sanganer,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
22. Kamad Ram Regar S/o Shri Hajari Lal Regar, Aged About
45 Years, R/o Village And Post Chitiwas, Tehsil Kekri,
District Ajmer, Rajasthan.
23. Brijendra Singh S/o Shri Harghyan Singh, Aged About 39
Years, R/o Village Ghamsu Ka Pura, Post Tali, Tehsil
Masalpur, District Karauli, Rajasthan.
24. Haretee Lal Meena S/o Shri Dwarika Meena, Aged About
39 Years, R/o Village And Post Kunjela, Tehsil Nadoti,
District Karauli, Rajasthan.
25. Nadan Singh Meena S/o Shri Durga Lal Meena, Aged
About 46 Years, R/o Village And Post Bamanwas, Patpi
Khurd, Tehsil Bamanwas, District Sawaimadhopur,
Rajasthan.
(Downloaded on 11/07/2019 at 11:10:34 PM)
(3 of 6) [CW-11690/2019]
26. Sangeeta Shakywal D/o Shri Dev Kishor, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Plot No. 4, Maruti Nagar, Charbuja
(Rawatbhata), District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan.
27. Dharmraj Yogi S/o Shri Ganeshnath Yogi, Aged About 42
Years, R/o Village Bangni, Post Bangna, Tehsil Baran,
District Baran, Rajasthan.
28. Ramprasad Sharma S/o Shri Brijmohan Sharma, Aged
About 38 Years, R/o Village Barala, Post Khijuriya
Brahminan, Via Shivdaspura, Tehsil Bassi, District Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
29. Vandana Rathore D/o Shri Madan Lal Rathore, Aged About
36 Years, R/o Plot No. 2-R-5, Talvandi, District Kota,
Rajasthan.
30. Menpal S/o Shri Pooran Mal Jatav, Aged About 38 Years,
R/o Village And Post Vajirpur, Tehsil Vajirpur, District
Sawaimadhopur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary
(Education), Department Of Education, Rajasthan Govt.
Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. The Director, Primary Education, Bikaner Rajasthan.
3. The Distict Education Officer (Primary), District-
Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
4. The Distict Education Officer (Primary), District-Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
5. The Distict Education Officer (Primary), District-Baran,
Rajasthan.
6. The Distict Education Officer (Primary), District-
Chittorgarh, Rajasthan.
7. The Distict Education Officer (Primary), District-Bharatpur,
Rajasthan.
8. The Distict Education Officer (Primary), District Badmer,
Rajasthan.
9. The Distict Education Officer (Primary), District Kota,
Rajasthan.
10. The Distict Education Officer (Primary), District
Dungarpur, Rajasthan.
11. The Distict Education Officer (Primary), District Banswara,
(Downloaded on 11/07/2019 at 11:10:34 PM)
(4 of 6) [CW-11690/2019]
Rajasthan.
12. The Distict Education Officer (Primary), District Karauli,
Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Praveen Poswal
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order 10/07/2019 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners inter alia with the prayer that Rule 14 of the Rajasthan Civil Services(Revised Pay Scale) Rules, 2008(for short 'the Rules of 2008') be declared ultra vires and unconstitutional, being violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and the respondents be directed to grant benefit of relaxation, as enumerated under Rule 3 of the Rules of 2008 to the petitioners and they be granted annual grade increment from the date, on which similarly situated persons have been granted, i.e., from 01.07.2010.
During the course of arguments, Mr. Praveen Poswal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has submitted that he does not press the challenge to Rule 14 of the Rules of 2008 on peculiar facts of this case provided the State Government is directed to consider petitioners' case for grant of one time relaxation to them.
Selection of the petitioners as Upper Primary Teachers was made with the Primary Teachers. Candidates of both the categories appeared in the common written examination and (Downloaded on 11/07/2019 at 11:10:34 PM) (5 of 6) [CW-11690/2019] participated in process of selection. Common merit list was prepared, but the appointments were given on the basis of qualification/eligibility of the candidates. Appointments of the Primary Teachers were made on 24.09.2007, but the State Government delayed appointments of the petitioners as Upper Primary Teachers and eventually their appointment orders were issued on 01.01.2008. In between, State Government vide notification dated 12.09.2008 promulgated Rajasthan Civil Services(Revised Pay Scale) Rules, 2008. According to Rule 14 of the Rules of 2008, batch of the candidates appointed on the post of Primary Teachers received increment on 01.07.2010 since they completed one year probation period after their appointment before the applicability of the aforesaid notification, but in the case of petitioners, since their appointment was delayed, they could not complete their probation and their increment would be delayed by one year and would be payable on 01.07.2011. Learned counsel has invited attention of the Court towards Rule 3 of the Rules of 2008, where the Governor retains the power to relax the rule in the case of undue hardship in any particular case.
Prima facie, we are satisfied that it is a case of hardship, but since the State Government has not examined this matter, we refrain from expressing any further opinion, except requiring the State Government to have the case of the petitioners examined for grant of one time relaxation, so as to consider their case and bring them at par with the Primary Teachers appointed in the same process of selection held in pursuance of same advertisement by granting them one increment, may be (Downloaded on 11/07/2019 at 11:10:34 PM) (6 of 6) [CW-11690/2019] notionally, with effect from 01.07.2010 considering that they were actually in service on that date and even prior thereto.
We, therefore, direct the State Government to undertake necessary exercise and pass appropriate order with regard thereto within a period of four months from the date of production of copy of this order. It goes without saying that in case grievances of the petitioners are not remedied, the petitioners would be at liberty to file fresh writ petition with the same prayer as made in the present writ petition and also incorporating challenge to the order that may be passed by the State Government.
With the aforesaid direction, writ petition stands disposed of.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J Manish/Manoj/111 (Downloaded on 11/07/2019 at 11:10:34 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)