S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.1507/2009 Rameshwar Lal Verma Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. Date of order : 10.02.2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PREM SHANKER ASOPA Mr.Subhash Bisawa Dadhich for petitioner. Issue notice to the respondents. Mr. Zakawat Ali, Dy. Government Counsel is directed to accept the notice. Since the controversy relating to not protected higher pay scale and other ancillary relief are covered by the Division Bench of this Court dated 13.12.2007 passed in Special Appeal (Writ) No. 208/06 & other connected writ petitions titled as State of Rajasthan Vs. Ramniwas Porwal reported in (2008(2) WLC 406), therefore, with the consent of the parties, the case was heard finally. This Court while deciding the similar writ petition No. 13824/2008 titled as Ratanlal Shastri Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. vide order dated 15.12.2008 directed the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the competent authority within one month and if such a representation is submitted, the authority is directed to consider the same and pass speaking order in terms of the judgment of the Division Bench passed in State of Rajasthan Vs. Ramniwas Porwal & State of Rajasthan Vs. Shyam Swaroop Updhayaya within two months thereafter communicated the decision to the petitioner. The relevant portion of the said judgment of Ratanlal Shastri is as follows :- “ A bunch of 62 Special Appeals (Writ) (No.36/05 State of Rajasthan Vs. Shyam Swaroop Upadhayaya) also came up for consideration before Division Bench at Jaipur Bench- that too vide judgment dated 04.04.08 (per Hon. Mr. R.M. Lodha, J.) were disposed of in the light of judgment in State of Rajasthan Vs. Ramniwas Porwal (2008(2) WLC 406, ibid) ad infra: “The existing teachers who have been promoted as Senior Teacher in the second selection grade prior to commencement of the Rules at any time but because of non- completion of 10 years of service as Senior Teacher under the revised pay rules are required to be fixed in lower pay scale. Their continuance in higher pay scale protected as pay scale personal to the under Note to Rule 6 would remain to that extent.” Without going into merits at this stage, this Court considers it appropriate to direct the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the competent authority within one month and if such a representation is submitted, the authority is directed to consider the same and pass speaking order in terms of judgment (supra) by Division Bench of this Court in State of Rajasthan Vs. Ramniwas Porwal & State of Rajasthan Vs. Shyam Swaroop Updhayaya (quoted supra) within two months thereafter and communicate its decision to petitioner also who if feels aggrieved thereby, will be free to avail of remedy under law. With the observations (supra), the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.” Counsel for the respondents does not dispute the aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench. The present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the judgment of Ratan Lal Shastri Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (PREM SHANKER ASOPA),J. Gandhi 17