1 D.B.Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.503/2009 State of Raj. & ors. V/s Krishna Murari Sharma & ors. 12.7.2010 Hon'ble the Chief Justice Mr.Jagdish Bhalla Hon'ble Mr.Justice M.N.Bhandari Mr.Dinesh Yadav, Addl.Advocate General for the appellants. Mr.Hanuman Choudhary for the respondents. The learned Addl.Advocate General submits that by the impugned judgment dated 28th November, 2008, the learned Single Judge has granted regular pay scale of the post on which the respondents- petitioners were absorbed without taking note of the fact that absorption was made on the post on fixed pay of Rs.1200/-p.m.. Thus, impugned judgment deserves to be set aside. The learned counsel for the respondents- petitioners, on the other hand, submits that they were appointed initially in municipal services on regular basis, however, they were declared surplus and absorbed on the post of Gram Sewak. While absorbing them, they cannot be denied the regular pay scale admissible to the post by treating it to be a fresh appointment. Even in the case where the persons were given fresh appointments, the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Prashant Vohra and anr. V/s State of Raj. & ors. (RLR 2005(2) page 404) held that such employees are entitled for regular pay scale from the date of initial appointment. The Division Bench however denied actual benefits to the appellants therein, but 2 notional fixation was permitted. The learned Single Judge has granted the same benefit to the respondents. Thus, appeal may be dismissed. We have considered the submissions of the parties. It is not in dispute that the respondents- petitioners were initially appointed in municipal services. They were thereafter declared surplus and absorbed, but they were denied regular pay scale of the post on which they were absorbed. On absorption, status of the employee cannot be changed. On the aforesaid basis itself, the respondents-petitioners could not have been denied benefit of regular pay of the post on which respondents were absorbed. In any case, the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Prashant Vohra (supra) came to the conclusion that the benefit of regular pay scale has to be granted from the date of initial appointment though on notional basis. The ratio of the aforesaid case is applicable to the present case also. In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any error in the impugned judgment. More so, when the respondents have been allowed notional benefit of the pay scale from the date of absorption and actual benefit thereafter, which has been allowed now. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. (M.N.Bhandari)J. (Jagdish Bhalla)C.J. 3 Parmar