1 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2339/2009 Shyam Sunder Gaur. vs. State of Rajasthan & ors. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2339/2009 Shyam Sunder Gaur. vs. State of Rajasthan and others. Date : 15.7.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.VN Kalla, for the petitioner. - - - - - Heard. According to the petitioner, the State Government decided to absorb the work charge employees on the post of Gram Sewak and Paden Sachiv. The petitioner who was working on the post of Beldar was adjusted on the post of Gram Sewak and Paden Sachiv on the vacant post on the pay scale of 2610-65-3540. The petitioner claims that he is entitled to pay scale of 3200-85-4900 and for that purpose, he submitted representation to the respondents on 21.11.2007. The petitioner's contention is that the matter came up before the 2 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2339/2009 Shyam Sunder Gaur. vs. State of Rajasthan & ors. Division Bench of this Court in the case of Prashant Vohra and Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. reported in 2005(1) WLC (Raj.) 264 wherein the respondents were directed to give notional benefit of pay scale of Rs.3200-85-4900 to the appellants of that case from the date of their initial appointment till 1.6.2002 and thereafter, to give actual benefit of regular pay scale and it has been held that the petitioner's salary shall be fixed afresh within a period of two months. It has also been observed that the Division Bench neither expressly nor by implication held the appellants of that case to be entitled to secure actual payment of salary on the basis of pay scale of Rs.3200-85-4900 from the date of initial appointment to the date of confirmation and further held that it is only from the date of confirmation that the appellants will be entitled to limited relief as indicated above. It is submitted that the decision given in the case of Prashant Vohra (supra) was challenged before the Hon'ble Apex Court and the SLP was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court on 8.9.2005. In view of the above, the petitioner's contention 3 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2339/2009 Shyam Sunder Gaur. vs. State of Rajasthan & ors. is that the respondents be directed to pass appropriate orders in the light of the Division Bench judgment referred above. Since the petitioner's representation has not been considered and according to the petitioner, no order has been passed on the petitioner's representation yet by the respondents, therefore, this writ petition is disposed of and the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the decision given in the case of Prashant Vohra (supra) and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order along with a copy of representation by the respondents. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. S.Phophaliya