Rajasthan High Court

Kudiya Ram Saini vs State P H E D And Ors on 17 January, 2023

Bench: Anoop Kumar Dhand

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7333/2015

Kudiya Ram Saini S/o Late Shri Deendayal Saini, aged 58 1/2
years, R/o Plot No.18, Shanti Nagar, Tuleda Road, Alwar,
Presently Working On The Post Of Electric Foreman-II (Adhoc),
P.H.E.D. City Sub-Division-III, Alwar.
                                                                  ----Petitioner
                                  Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary, Public
       Health And Engineering Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
       Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.     Chief Engineer (Rural) Public Health And Engineering
       Department, Rajasthan, Jal Bhawan, Jaipur.
3.     The Superintending Engineer, Circle PHED, Alwar.
4.     Executive Engineer, P.H.E.D. Division, Alwar.
                                                               ----Respondents

Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15732/2017 Kharati Lal Son Of Late Shri Hari Chand, aged about 69 years, Resident Of 2/470, Arawali Vihar, Kalakua, Housing Board, Alwar Raj.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary, Public Health And Engineering Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. Chief Engineer (Rural), Public Health And Engineering Department Rajasthan, Jal Bhawan, Jaipur.

3. The Superintending Engineer, Circle PHED, Alwar.

4. Executive Engineer, P.H.E.D. Division, Alwar.

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15597/2017

1. Shanti Devi Wife Of Late Shri Babu Lal Saini, aged about 58 years, Resident Of 16-F, Heerabas, Near Steam Power House, Alwar (Raj).

2. Hansa Devi Poshwal Wife Of Late Shri Prabhu Singh

(2 of 6) [CW-7333/2015]

Poshwal, aged about 64 years, Resident Of D-222, Mansarowar Colony, Kalakua, Housing Board, Alwar.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary, Public Health And Engineering Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

2. Chief Engineer (Rural), Public Health And Engineering Department Rajasthan, Jal Bhawan, Jaipur.

3. The Superintending Engineer, Circle PHED, Alwar

4. Executive Engineer, PHED Division, Alwar

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Meenakshi Pareek Mr. K.N. Sharma Mr. Kuldeep Bhatia For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Meel, Dy. G.C.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Order

17/01/2023

Instant petitions have been filed by the petitioners with

the following prayers:

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7333/2015

"(i) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, respondents may kindly be directed to regularize the service of the petitioner on the post of Foreman-II (Electrical) with all consequential benefit since his initial date of appointment on the post of Foreman-II.

(ii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may further be directed to consider and upgrade the post of Foreman-II (Electrical) to the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) and petitioner may be appointed on the said post with all consequential benefits.

(iii) The respondents may be directed to consider and promote the petitioner on the post of Foreman Grade-I with all consequential benefits.

(iv) Alternatively and without prejudice to other submissions, the respondents may be directed to grant the benefit of selection Grade of 9-18-27 years service to the petitioner and arrears thereof with interest.

                                                  (3 of 6)          [CW-7333/2015]

             (v)    By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the

respondents may also be directed to promote the petitioner on the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) in accordance with law.

(vi) Any other order which this Hon'ble Court deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner."

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15732/2017

"(i) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to regularize the service of the petitioner on the post of Foreman-II (Electrical) with all consequential benefit since his initial date of appointment on the post of Foreman-II.

(iii) The respondents may be directed to consider and promote the petitioner on the post of Foreman-I with all consequential benefits.

(iv) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may also be directed to promote the petitioner on the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) in accordance with law.

(v) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner."

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15597/2017

"(i) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to regularize the service of late Shri Babu Lal Saini & Late Prabhu Singh Poshwal on the post of Foreman-II (Electrical) with all consequential benefit since their initial date of appointment on the post of Foreman-II.

(ii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may further be directed to consider and upgrade the post of Foreman-II (Electrical) to the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) and Shri Babu Lal Saini & Prabhu Singh Poshwal may be notionally appointed on the said post with all consequential benefits.

(iii) The respondents may be directed to consider and promote late Shri Babu Lal Saini & Late Prabhu Singh Poshwal on the post of Foreman-I with all consequential benefits.

(iv) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may also be directed to promote Shri Babu Lal Saini & Prabhu Singh Poshwal on the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) in accordance with law.

(v) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may kindly be passed

(4 of 6) [CW-7333/2015]

in favour of the petitioners."

At the outset, learned counsels for the petitioners

submit that the controversy involved in these petitions has already

been decided by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Principal

Seat in the case of Gulab Singh Rajpurohit vs. State of

Rajasthan and Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7332/2007)

decided on 02.09.2014 by observing thus:

"5. Having heard the parties and perusal of the pleadings, this Court is satisfied that the case of the petitioner for upgradation of post of Foreman Grade-II to the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) as recommended by the Chief Engineer (Rural), PHED, Jodhpur, vide the letter dated 19.08.2002 (Annex.11) deserves sympathetic consideration by the respondents.

6. During the course of arguments, the petitioner has also produced a copy of the minutes of meeting held on 29.07.1991 and 03.08.1991 of the competent authority i.e. the Dy. Secretary, PHED, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur, wherein it was discussed that the appointment of the Diploma holders working in the Department may be accorded to the petitioner, who was working as Foreman-II. The relevant extract of the minutes dated 29.07.1991 and 03.08.1991 is reproduced herein below for ready reference:-

"It was decided that:

i) Names of persons possessing diploma in Electrical Engineering and working in the Department as Junior Engineers should be forwarded to REDA for appointment or deputation there.

ii) Since direct recruitment is provided on the post of Foreman-II, persons who are working in subordinate positions for two years in the Department and are possessing a diploma in Electrical/Mechanical Engieering be appointed as Foreman-II on ad-hoc basis immediately against the direct recruitment post of Foreman-II. To regularise their cases, the case for necessary amendment in the rules should also be sent to DOP to incorporate the word "Electrical" in additional to "Mechanical" as the minimum qualification for recruitment to these posts.

iii) For Civil Diploma holders, the Electrical posts below J. En. Available for direct recruitment is Junior Draftsman and hence persons with diploma in Civil Engineering who are working in subordinate position (sic!) ......appointed as Junior Draftsman on ad-hoc basis and then action be taken for regularise them.

(iv) While taking action under (ii) and (iii) above, the provisions relating to reservation quota may also be followed.

                                                 (5 of 6)            [CW-7333/2015]

                                                                         Sd/-
                                                     Deputy Secretary, PHED"

7. The case of the petitioner is also similarly situated, therefore, there appears no valid rhyme or reason for not considering the case of the petitioner on the same lines.

The petitioner further submitted that he is nearing the age of retirement and is presently 59 years of age. The Office- in-Charge, present in the Court is also could not point any significant reason for which the petitioner's case not was considered by the respondents.

8. Therefore, the present writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be allowed and the same is, accordingly, allowed and the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for upgradation and further promotion in accordance with law on the same lines as Foreman working in Mechanical Engineering were considered in the meeting of the respondents authorities on 29.07.1991 and 03.08.1991. The aforesaid consideration may be completed and appropriate orders be passed by the respondents the case of the petitioner, within a period of three months from today. No costs. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned parties forthwith."

Counsels for the petitioners submit that against the

judgment of Gulab Singh Rajpurohit (supra), no special appeal

was filed by the State and the same attained finality. Counsels

submit that the directions issued by the co-ordinate Bench in the

case of Gulab Singh Rajpurohit (supra) have already been

complied by the respondents. Counsels submit that the instant

petitions may also be disposed of in the light of aforesaid

judgment.

Counsel for the respondents is not in a position to

controvert the submissions made by the learned counsel for the

petitioners.

In view of above, these petitions are disposed of in the