CW 149/06 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.149/06 Suresh Chand Bhatnagar Versus Rajasthan Agricultural University & Anr. DATE OF ORDER : 04/02/2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. Mahesh Gupta, for petitioner Mr. Naina Ram, for respondents *** Instant petition has been filed by petitioner assailing order Ann.4 dt.22nd August, 2005 and so also consequential order Ann.6 dt.7th November, 2005 whereby he was not granted the benefit of selection scale on completion of 27 yrs. of service on the premise that petitioner is not member of agricultural wing/category. It has been informed to this court that controversy raised in the instant petition has been decided by Co-ordinate Bench of this court in Bajrang Singh Rathore Vs. State of Rajasthan [2005 (4) WLC-126] whereby retrospective effect of amendment, which makes the petitioner dis- entitled for grant of selection scale on completion of 27 yrs. of service, has been declared to be unconstitutional – relevant Para 41 whereof is reproduced as under: “Thus, after issuance of the impugned notification dtd.3.9.1998 [Annex.7] and CW 149/06 [2] circular dtd.12.10.1998 with retrospective effect, the secured and vested rights of the petitioners have been taken away as when the petitioners were granted the first selection grade, they were eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Agriculture Officers. A benefit that has accrued to the petitioner under the existing Rules cannot be taken away by an amendment with retrospective effect and no statutory rule or administrative order can whittle down or destroy any right which has become crystallized and no rule can be framed under the Proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India which affects or impairs the vested rights. The act of the respondents in issuing impugned notifications retrospectively which have the effect of taking away the benefit already available to the petitioners under the existing rule, is arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and thus, this writ petition deserves to be allowed.” This has not been disputed by counsel for respondents also about the controversy being decided by the judgment [supra]. Consequently, writ petition stands allowed. Orders Ann.4 dt.22nd August, 2005 & Ann.6 dt.7th November, 2005 are hereby quashed and set aside. Respondents are directed to consider case of the petitioner for grant of selection scale on completion of 27 yrs. of service in view of judgment [supra]. Necessary orders be passed within three months. No costs. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. FRBOHRA149CW06 4-2.doc