[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Tagaram vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:9051) on 18 February, 2026

Author: Nupur Bhati

Bench: Nupur Bhati

[2026:RJ-JD:9051]

    HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                            JODHPUR
             S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18887/2025
Tagaram S/o Bhemaram, Aged About 63 Years, Shivnathpura
Colony, Sanchore District Jalore (Raj.).
                                                      ----Petitioner
                              Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
       Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Secretariat,
       Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.     The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Jalore, District
       Jalore.
3.     The Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti Jalore, District
       Jalore.
4.     The Joint Director, Pensions And Pensioners Welfare
       Department, Jaipur Raj.
5.     The Additional Director, Pension And Pensioners Welfare
       Department, Jalore.
                                                  ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. Gajendra Singh Chouhan
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. Nilesh Choudhary for Mr. Kuldeep
                                 Vaishnav, Dy. GC


         HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order 18/02/2026

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the

following prayers:-

"(i) The respondents may kindly be directed to declare that the petitioner is entitled to the grant of ACP/Selection Grade reckoned from the date of his initial appointment i.e., 14.02.1986, and not from the date of absorption i.e., 01.05.2002.

(ii) The impugned action of the respondents in granting ACP/ Selection Grade only from 01.05.2011 (1st ACP) and 01.05.2020 (2nd ACP), as being illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to law.

The respondents may kindly be directed to to grant and release in favour of the petitioner: First ACP/Selection Grade w.e.f. 14.02.1995, Second ACP/Selection Grade w.e.f. 14.02.2004, and Third ACP/Selection 14.02.2013, Grade w.e.f. along with all consequential benefits including refixation of pay, arrears, and revision of to pensionary benefits. direct the Consequence thereof, respondents revise the pension, gratuity, commutation, and all retiral dues of the petitioner on the basis of correct fixation of pay as per the above ACP/Selection Grades, and to release the arrears with

(Uploaded on 19/02/2026 at 01:08:47 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:9051] (2 of 5) [CW-18887/2025]

interest at such rate as this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper.

(iii) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners.

(iv) Writ Petition filed by the petitioners may kindly be allowed with cost."

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially

appointed on a regular post in the Municipality, Sanchore on

14.02.1986 and, upon closure of the Municipality, was declared

surplus and subsequently absorbed in the respondent department

on 01.05.2002 with protection of pay and continuity of service.

Despite rendering continuous service since 1986, the respondents,

while granting Assured Career Progression (ACP)/Selection

Grades, erroneously reckoned his service only from the date of

absorption instead of from his initial appointment, and

consequently granted him the first ACP w.e.f. 01.05.2011 and the

second ACP w.e.f. 01.05.2020, though he was entitled to the first,

second and third ACP on 14.02.1995, 14.02.2004 and 14.02.2013

respectively. The incorrect reckoning of service has resulted in

substantial financial loss and has adversely affected his retiral

benefits, including pension and gratuity, and despite submission of

representation, the respondents have failed to grant him the due

benefits, compelling him to file the present writ petition seeking

grant of ACP/Selection Grades from the date of his initial

appointment along with all consequential benefits including

refixation of pay and revision of pensionary dues. Hence, the

present writ petition.

(Uploaded on 19/02/2026 at 01:08:47 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:9051] (3 of 5) [CW-18887/2025]

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

respondents have denied the petitioner the benefits of Assured

Carrer Progression (ACP)/Selection Grades on completion of 9, 18

and 27 years of service reckoned from his initial date of

appointment i.e. 14.02.1986. He submits that the respondents are

considering the initial date of appointment of the petitioner as

07.03.2002. He also submits that the issue involved in the instant

writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of Co-ordinate

Bench of this Court in the case of Prem Shankar Ameta Vs.

State of Rajasthan & Ors : SBCWP No.4372/2018, & other

connected matters, decided on 04.08.2023, wherein the Court

while dealing with the issue, has allowed the writ petition and

directed the respondents to confer the benefits of selection grade/

ACP to the petitioners therein on completion of 9, 18 & 27 years of

service w.e.f. the date of their initial appointment as Sub-Nakedar

in their respective municipalities.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent is not in a position to

refute the fact that the issued involved in the present writ petition

is squarely covered by judgment in the case of Prem Shankar

Ameta (supra).

5. For ready reference, relevant part of the order dated

04.08.2023 passed in the case of Prem Shankar Ameta (supra)

is reproduced hereunder:-

"xxxxxx

19. The condition No.1 which has been incorporated to exclude the period of petitioner's services as Sub-Nakedar prior to absorption for the purpose of promotion cannot be used to deprive the petitioner of his rightful claim of getting

(Uploaded on 19/02/2026 at 01:08:47 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:9051] (4 of 5) [CW-18887/2025]

benefits of selection grade/ACP w.e.f. his regular appointment which in the present case is concededly, 01.02.1995.

20. The post of Sub-Nakedar was a cadre post and the petitioner was appointed against a vacant post, as is evident from his appointment order. Hence, he had entered the State services with effect from 01.02.1995. The State's decision to abolish the post and to absorb all the Sub-Nakedars in different departments cannot have the effect of forefeiture of the services which the petitioner has rendered in Municipal Board. But for abolition of post and petitioner's absorption in Panchayati Raj Department, he would definitely get the advantage of stagnation benefit (by whatever name called) from the date of his initial appointment.

21. For what has been discussed herein above, all the captioned writ petitions (which involve identical facts narrated hereinabove) are hereby allowed.

22. The respondents are directed to confer the benefits of selection grade/ACP to the petitioners on completion of 9-18- 27 years of service w.e.f. the date of their initial appointment as Sub Nakedar in their respective municipalities.

23. The respondents shall rework or calculate the benefits of selection grade/ACP already granted to the petitioners, making the same effective from their initial date of appointment.

24. While carrying out such exercise, the respondents shall be free to examine individual case and to ascertain as to whether the appointment of the petitioner(s) was against vacant post and a regular pay scale was granted to them or not and if given from which date it was given.

25. Necessary exercise be done within a period of three months from today and such calculation be intimated to the petitioners. After calculation has been made, it will be required of the respondent-State to pay the consequential benefit/amount to the petitioners within a period of three months therefrom.