Smt Anita Jain vs Raj State Indust.And Investment ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 707 Raj/2

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 707 Raj/2
Judgement Date : 31 January, 2024

Rajasthan High Court

Smt Anita Jain vs Raj State Indust.And Investment ... on 31 January, 2024

Author: Ganesh Ram Meena

Bench: Ganesh Ram Meena

[2024:RJ-JP:5177]                         (1 of 4)                          [CW-1788/2000]


         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                     BENCH AT JAIPUR

                    S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1788/2000
Smt Anita Jain
                                                                           ----Petitioner
                                         Versus
Raj State Indust.and Investment
                                                                        ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)              :     Mr. R.A. Katta
For Respondent(s)              :     Mr. Anil Bhardwaj
                                     Mr. Anirudh Singh Rathore


              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA
                               Judgment / Order
31/01/2024

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to quash

and set aside the order dated 22.11.1999, whereby the

representation submitted by him was not accepted. The petitioner

further prayed to issue directions to the respondents either to

allow him to submit revised option as per the

RIICO Employees (Revised Pay Scale) Rules, 1987 (for short 'the

Rules of 1987') or her pay may be stepped up with Sh. T.C. Nayak

from 23.11.1988.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that one of the juniors

namely; TC Nayak is drawing higher salary than the petitioner

because of exercising the option of the Rules of 1987 and when

the petitioner requested the respondents to allow her to re-

exercise the option, the same was not accepted by the

respondents. In support of his submissions counsel for the

petitioner has also relied upon the order dated 16.10.2008

passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil

[2024:RJ-JP:5177] (2 of 4) [CW-1788/2000]

Writ Petition No.6671/1994 "Om Prakash Sharma Vs. State

of Rajasthan & Ors.

Counsel for the respondents submits that as per Rule 15 (3)

of the Rules of1987, an employee of the Corporation shall exercise

and convey the option to the appointing authority and in case no

option is received within the stipulated period, fixation of pay on

promotion shall be made under alternative (a) of thereof and The

Option once exercised shall be final.

Counsel for the respondents further submits that the

petitioner has availed all the retiral benefits including gratuity,

pension etc. without any protest and therefore the present petition

has become infructuous.

Considered the submissions made by counsels for the

respective parties.

The facts borne out from the pleadings are that the

petitioner was initially appointed on ad hoc basis on the post of

Junior Assistant in the Rajasthan State Industrial Development

and Investment Corporation Ltd., at Alwar in the year 1977 and

later on she was regularly appointed on the post of Junior

Assistant by order dated 01.08.1977. On 25.01.1985 a seniority

list of Junior Assistants working under the said Department was

published and when the Rules of 1987 came into force, the

petitioner opted a new pay scale of Rs. 895-1720 for the post of

Junior Assistant and she was fixed at Rs. 1180/- on 01.09.1986.

Afterward, the petitioner was promoted on the post of a Senior

Assistant by order dated 21.09.1987 in pay scale of 1120-2050.

The petitioner was further promoted on the Post of Section

Incharge vide order dated 03.04.1995 and she was fixed at

[2024:RJ-JP:5177] (3 of 4) [CW-1788/2000]

Rs.1640/- in the pay scale of 1640-2900. On 06.04.1991 the

petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents for

revised option in view of the fact that the person junior to her

namely; T.C. Nayak is getting higher salary than her, which was

not accepted by the respondents and in regard thereto the

petitioner was intimated vide letter dated 22.11.1999.

Rule 15(3) of the Rules of 1987 is relevant which reads

thus:-

"Fixation of pay in the revised pay scales subsequent to 01.09.1986:

Where a Corporation employee continue to draw his pay in the existing pay scale and opts to draw pay in the Revised Pay Scale from a date later than 1st Sept. 1986, his pay from the later date in revised pay scale shall be fixed on the basis of his prefixation emoluments on that date instead of as on 01.09.1986 as defined in Rule 5(4) of these rules.

(1) A Corporation employee who opts for Revised Pay Scale from a date subsequent to 01.09.1986, on promotion during the period commencing after 01.09.1986 but prior to the date of option for revised pay scales may also opt for fixation of pay under rule 23 of RIICO Service Rules-

(a) either on the date of promotion, or

(b) on the date of option for revised payscales for lower post he is holding immediately before the date of promotion. (3) Option will be exercised and conveyed to the appointing authority within a period of two months from the date of order of promotion or the date of issue of these rules whichever is later. In case no option is received within the stipulated period, fixation of pay on promotion shall be made under alternative (a) above. Option once exercised shall be final."

The provisions of Rule 15 of the Rules of 1987 is not under

challenge in the present petition and the respondents as well as

the petitioner has to abide by the rules framed for regulation of

their service conditions including the pay scales. The petitioner

[2024:RJ-JP:5177] (4 of 4) [CW-1788/2000]

has not been able to show any kind of illegality of the respondent

department in not accepting the claim of the petitioner for re-

exercising the option under the revised pay scale Rules 1987.

On going through the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench

of this Court in the case of Om Prakash Sharma (supra), it is

revealed that it was a case of a particular department under the

State of Rajasthan wherein the order was passed in favour of the