1 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5850/2007 Padma Ram Meena v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Order :: 17th July, 2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. Sandeep Shah, for the petitioner. Mr. Rajesh Bhati, for the respondents. .... Though the relief claimed by the petitioner in this petition for writ has been granted but the facts of the case warrants compensation to the petitioner for the injury and agony he suffered for years together due to inaction on part of the respondents. The petitioner entered in the services of the respondents being appointed as Forester in the pay scale of Rs.110-230 under an order dated 19.6.1971. A promotion was accorded to him as Deputy Ranger in the pay scale of Rs.370-590 by an order dated 29.5.1980. The post of Deputy Ranger was subsequently designated as Ranger Gr.II and the petitioner is yet holding the same post. While permitting the petitioner as Deputy Ranger (Ranger Gr.II) his pay was fixed in the pay scale of Rs.370-590 and he also earned annual grade increments upto the step of Rs.445/-, however, subsequent thereto no increment was awarded to the petitioner and his pay was also not fixed in subsequent corresponding revised pay scales. A 2 petition for writ being SBCivil Writ Petition No.1089/2005, therefore, was filed by the petitioner and that came to be decided on 23.2.2005 with direction to the respondents as follows:- “Thus, this writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of in the manner that the respondents are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner already filed in accordance with law and in case the petitioner wants to file a fresh representation, he can file the same within a period of 15 days from today and the respondents/competent authority shall consider and decide the same, in accordance with law, within two months from the date of receipt of the representation. If it is found that the petitioner is entitled for any relief in accordance with law, then the same may be given to the petitioner and if the petitioner is not found entitled to the relief sought for, then a reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with the Rules, be passed, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. There will be no order as to costs.” After disposal of the writ petition aforesaid the petitioner made all necessary efforts to get the directions given by this Court complied with, however, no adequate action was taken by the respondents. The petitioner, therefore, left with no option but to approach this Court by way of filing present petition for writ. 3 This Court on 14.9.2007, while issuing notice to the respondents, ordered as follows:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even after issuance of writ by this Court on 23.02.2005, the case of the petitioner concerning grant of revised pay scales, increments, selection grades etc. has yet not been decided by the respondents. Issue notice, returnable on 05.10.2007. A copy of writ petition may be supplied in advance to Mr.R.Dave, Dy. Government Advocate in order to enable him to complete his instructions. If the case of the petitioner is not finalised before the next date of hearing fixed in this case, the officer concerned holding the post of Dy. Chief Conservator of Forest (Project), Dantiwada, Abu Road, shall remain present personally before the court alongwith complete record. A copy of of this order be supplied to learned Dy. Government Advocate in order to enable him to inform the Department. Put up on 05.10.2007 per-emptorily.” The respondents in pursuant to the order dated 14.9.2007 granted all due increments as well as selection grades to the petitioner after making fixation of his pay in corresponding revised pay 4 scales. The grievance of the petitioner, thus, stands redressed, however, the respondents acted for redressing grievance of the petitioner only when a direction was given by this Court either to finalise all dues of the petitioner or the officer concerned holding the post of Deputy Chief Conservator of Forest (Project), Dantiwada, Abu Road remain present before the Court. The approach and attitude of the respondents is highly deplorable in present case as at first instance they did not choose to act as per law by granting increments and selection grades to the petitioner by making fixation of his pay in revised pay scales. They also never cared to make compliance of the directions given by this Court in SBCivil Writ Petition No.1089/2005, decided on 23.2.2005. The respondents acted upon the order dated 14.9.2007 only in view of the fact that a direction was given to the officer concerned to remain present before the Court. If the respondents were having any genuine problem in making fixation of the petitioner's pay granting increments and selection grades, they could have come before the Court with adequate explanation. The petitioner has already been retired from service on attaining the age of 58 years. During his entire service tenure the respondents did not allow him, his rightful claim. The fact that the respondents immediately after issuance of the order dated 14.9.2007 redressed grievance of the petitioner establishes it well that the petitioner was harassed 5 and he suffered agony for years together only because of prevailing redtapism in Department of Forest. The petitioner has received his dues after years together and, therefore, looking to the facts of the case he certainly deserves to be compensated either by interest or by a suitable amount of compensation. The process of determination of interest will further consume time and that will also prolong agony of the petitioner. Accordingly, instead of awarding interest, I consider it appropriate to direct the respondents to compensate the injury caused to the petitioner. The respondents determined the sum of Rs.9,45,796/- only as the dues sought to be paid and out of that deducted a sum of Rs.3,36,040/-, including the income tax of Rs.1,41,834/- only. If the respondents would have paid the petitioner's claim at the time relevant, he would have not suffered that tax, thus, the compensation required to be paid to the petitioner is determined as Rs.1,41,834/- (Rupees one lac forty one thousand eight hundred thirty four only) and that should be paid within a period of four months from today. The petition for writ is disposed of accordingly. ( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. kkm/ps.