Ramesh Chandra Suthar vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 7605 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:31371]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10006/2023

1. Ramesh Chandra Suthar S/o Shri Vasudev Suthar, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Ward No/ 2, Upala Fala, Barodiay , Banswara, Dist. Banswara (Raj).

2. Geeta Upadhyay W/o Shri Ganesh Lal Upadhyay, Aged About 57 Years, R/o Village And Post Moti Bassi, Kotiya Mohalla, Banswara (Raj)

3. Ajeet Singh S/o Shri Hari Singh Chouhan, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Cheerwalgadha, Post Minpur, Tehsil Ganoda Dist. Banswara (Raj)

4. Narayan Singh Chouhan S/o Shri Sawai Singh Chouhan, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Vi Post Motagaon, Tehsil Ganoda, Distt. Banswara (Raj)

5. Sukhalal Yadav S/o Shri Badiyaji, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Village Tunkwada, Tehsil Ganoda, Distt. Banswara (Raj)

6. Rekha Kattu W/o Shri Niranjan Lal Kattu, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Bahubali Colony, Opp. Jain Temple, Banswara (Raj)

7. Ashok Kumar Kattu S/o Shri Basant Lal Kattu, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Gandhi Marg, Opp. Jain Temple Kushalgarh, District Banswara (Raj)

8. Naresh Kumar Bhatt S/o Shri Vasudev Bhatt, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Ward No. 2, Nagwada, Banswara District Banswara (Raj)

9. Meena Sharma W/o Shri Devilal Sharma, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Village And Post Moti Bassi, Tehsil Arthuna, Distt. Banswara (Raj)

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To The Government, Department Of Secondary Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj).

2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan.

3. The District Education Officer (Hq), Elementary Education, Banswara, (Raj)

4. The Director, Pension And Pensioners Welfare Department, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur.

                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :    Mr. Sunil Kumar Singodiya, through
                                VC
For Respondent(s)          :    --





 [2023:RJ-JD:31371]                      (2 of 3)                         [CW-10006/2023]


                         JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

                                        Order

22/09/2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

petitioners may be allowed to file a representation to the

respondents for redressal of their grievance in view of the

judgment rendered by this Court at Jaipur Bench in D.B. Civil

Special Appeal (Writ) No.453/2006 (Narain Swarup

Sharma Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.), decided on

16.04.2015, wherein the Hon'ble Court held as under:-

"12. Para 3 of the Government Order dated 25.01.1992, speaks of counting the service of 9, 18 & 27 years, from the date of first appointment in the existing cadre/service, in accordance with the provisions contained in the recruitment Rules. There is no mention of the date of joining. In our view, the first appointment would mean the issuance of the appointment order, and not the joining, as explained by the Additional Advocate General.

13. In the legal parlance, there is a difference between the terms 'appointment' and 'joining'. A person may be appointed, with a date given for joining, or that, he may join, under certain circumstances, on a later date. The date of joining will however, not shift his date of appointment. Even if the pay and allowances are to be paid from the date of joining, the first appointment will be treated to be the date, given in the appointment letter. The clarification issued by the State Government, for counting the period of 9, 18 & 27 years, for the purposes of selection grades, is from the date of first appointment, and not the date, on which the Government servant joins.

[2023:RJ-JD:31371] (3 of 3) [CW-10006/2023]

14. In view of the above, the Special Appeal is allowed. The judgment of learned Single Judge is set aside. The respondents are directed to count the period of selection grade, for the purposes of 9 years, from the date of the first appointment i.e. 06.02.1996. All the consequential benefits will be given to the petitioner, by counting the date for grant of selection grade, w.e.f. 06.02.1996"

3. In view of the limited prayer made by the counsel for the

petitioners, the present writ petition is disposed of with liberty to

the petitioners to approach the respondents by way of filing a

representation and the respondents are directed to consider the

same in light of the judgment rendered by this Court in the case

of Narain Swarup Sharma (supra).

4. It is made clear that this order has been passed based on

the submissions made in the petition. The respondents would be

free to examine the veracity of the submissions made in the

petition and only in case, the averments made therein are found

to be correct, the petitioners would be entitled to the relief.

5. Needless to say, if the case of the petitioners is not similar to

the case of Narain Swarup Sharma (supra), the respondents will

be free to pass an appropriate order absolutely in accordance with

law.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 24-AbhishekS/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)