Vishnu Narayan Sharma vs Maharana Pratap Univ. Aand G ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 11084 Raj

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 11084 Raj
Judgement Date : 6 September, 2022

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Vishnu Narayan Sharma vs Maharana Pratap Univ. Aand G ... on 6 September, 2022

Bench: Rekha Borana

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3136/2011

Vishnu Narayan Sharma S/o Sh. Ayodhya Prasad Sharma, Aged 57 yrs., Resident of C/o Rajasthan College of Agriculture, Udaipur

----Petitioner Versus Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture & Technology, Udaipur through its Registrar.

                                                                ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Mukesh Vyas
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. G.R. Punia, Sr. Advocate assisted
                               by Mr. Rajesh Punia



            HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

                                    Order

06/09/2022

The present writ petition has been filed aggrieved of the

order dated 06.05.2008 whereby vide corrigendum issued by the

Registrar of the respondent University, it was directed as under:-

""The pension cases already decided in the past except in the cases where the writ-petitions are filed, will not be re-opened" instead of "The cases already decided in the past will not be re-opened.", as appeared in the last line of the office-order No. F. MPUAT/Estt/Gr.II/2008/775-82 dated 22nd April, 2008."

Vide order dated 22.04.2008, the selection grades to be

granted to the Drivers and the Junior Mechanics appointed with

the University were clarified by the University.

Brief facts of the case are as under:-

(2 of 4) [CW-3136/2011]

The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Mechanic vide

order dated 13.09.1978 on ad-hoc basis with the pay scale of

Rs.250-360. Vide order dated 04.03.1986, he was accorded the

higher pay scale of Rs.490-840. Vide the said order, he was also

promoted against the vacant post of Junior Mechanic. On

13.09.1996, he was granted the second selection grade with the

pay scale of Rs.4000-6000. Vide communication dated

21.10.1999, the case of the petitioner was recommended to be

considered as a Junior Mechanic in the grade of Rs.610-1090

w.e.f. 05.03.1986. The said recommendation was confirmed vide

order dated 03.11.1999 but subsequently vide order dated

28.01.2003, the said order was clarified and modified and it was

made clear that it would be deemed that the petitioner was never

promoted as Junior Mechanic in terms of the order dated

03.11.1999. It was specifically made clear that the petitioner

would be falling in the seniority list of Electrician and would be

promoted as Junior Mechanic as and when he would be eligible for

the same. A writ petition against the said order was preferred by

the petitioner which was dismissed and the special appeal against

the same was also dismissed. Meaning thereby, the order dated

04.03.1986 whereby the petitioner was granted the higher pay

scale of Rs.490-840 attained finality. Vide order dated 30.09.2004,

the petitioner was promoted as Junior Mechanic and was allowed

the selection grade of Rs.5000-8000 w.e.f. 13.09.2005. The case

of the petitioner is that as vide order dated 30.09.2004, he was

promoted as Junior Mechanic against the vacant post of Senior

Mechanic, he ought to have been granted the selection grade of

Rs.5500-9000 instead of Rs.5000-8000.

(3 of 4) [CW-3136/2011]

Learned counsel submitted that the pay scales of the Junior

Mechanic and the Senior Mechanic were same and therefore, he

ought to have been granted the next higher pay scale i.e.

Rs.5500-9000. Learned counsel relied upon the judgment passed

by this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4173/2009;

Narbada Shanker Ameta v. Maharana Pratap University of

Agriculture & Technology, decided on 01.09.2022.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted

that the case of the present petitioner would not be covered by

the judgment as passed in Narbada Shanker Ameta's case

(supra). Learned counsel submitted that in those matters, the

petitioners therein were the Drivers whereas the present petitioner

was originally appointed as the Assistant Mechanic which is a post

lower to the Driver. Learned counsel further submitted that the

present petitioner has already been granted the three financial

upgradations / promotions in terms of the notification dated

25.01.1992 and therefore, he would not even otherwise be

entitled for the next higher pay scale.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

A brief summary of the financial upgradations granted to the

petitioner during his complete service tenure would make the

things clear. The same are as follows:-

1. 13.07.1978 appointed as Assistant Mechanic with pay

scale of Rs.250-360.

2. 05.03.1986 pay scale of Rs.490-840 granted.

      13.09.1996       second selection grade of Rs.4000-6000



                                                                                (4 of 4)                     [CW-3136/2011]



                                                             granted.

                                          30.09.2004         promoted as Junior Mechanic.

19/21.09.2010 the selection grade of Rs.5000-8000 granted

w.e.f. 13.09.2005.

A bare perusal of the above chronological events makes it

clear that the petitioner had been granted three financial

upgradations in the form of either grant of the selection grade or a

promotion during the complete tenure of service. The petitioner

was never promoted as Senior Mechanic and therefore, the

anomaly pertaining to the same pay scale for the post of Junior

Mechanic and Senior Mechanic would not even come into picture

in the present matter. In the present case, it is clear that the

petitioner was granted the first higher pay scale on 05.03.1986,

the second selection grade on 13.09.1996 and the third selection