SBCWP2136/1997 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2136/1997 Smt. Nirmala Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan and Others Date of Order ::: 30.03.2010 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri Arun Sharma for Shri Prem Krishan, Counsel for petitioner Shri S.D. Khaspuria, Additional Government Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for parties. This writ petition has been filed by petitioner Smt. Nirmala Devi with prayer that respondents be directed to give her appointment in regular pay scale from the date of her initial appointment and grant her arrears of difference of pay from the date of her appointment. It is contended that petitioner's husband late Dharampal was working with respondents; he was initially appointed with respondent on 01.04.1985; subsequently, the respondent by order dated 19.09.1987 granted him semi-permanent status under the work- charged rules and fixed him in pay scale of SBCWP2136/1997 // 2 // 700-865 with effect from 01.04.1987. While serving the respondents, he unfortunately died in a bus accident on 09.12.1994. Petitioner applied and was granted compassionate appointment under the Rajasthan Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servant Dying While in Service Rules, 1975 (for shot, the Rules of 1975'), but the respondents vide order dated 15.10.1996 appointed her on daily-wage basis. It is contended that compassionate appointment is to be granted on regular basis. Learned counsel for petitioner, in support of his argument, cited a Division Bench judgment of this Court in State of Rajasthan and Another Vs. Ajay Sharma – RLR 2002 (2) 5. Shri S.D. Khaspuria, Additional Government Counsel appearing on behalf of respondnets, opposed writ petition and submitted that petitioner could not be granted regular appointment in view of government order dated 20.09.1995. She was appointed on daily wage basis only on compassionate ground but that does not furnish her any right to claim regular appointment. Respondents were not in a position to give her appointment on regular basis nor the Rules of 1975 so contemplates. It is contended that there was no violation of SBCWP2136/1997 // 3 // Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner cannot be given priority on regularly selected/appointed employees and that principle of 'equal pay for equal work' does not apply to her case. Upon hearing learned counsel for parties and perusing material on record, I find that assertion of petitioner that she was appointed on compassionate ground considering the fact that her husband died while in harness, is correct. Her husband was serving the respondents department at the time of his death. Respondents also not denied the fact that petitioner's late husband was already declared semi-permanent and started getting payment of salary in regular pay scale with effect from 01.04.1987. In those facts, plea set up by respondent department that petitioner even if compassionately appointed under the Rules of 1975, would be granted such appointment only on daily wage basis and not in regular pay scale as the regular appointment has to be made as per the relevant recruitment rules, cannot be accepted in view of Division Bench decision of this Court in State of Rajasthan and Another Vs. Ajay Sharma (supra). In the aforesaid case, Division Bench of this SBCWP2136/1997 // 4 // Court rejected similar contention holding that appointment made on compassionate ground under the Rules of 1975 shall be deemed to be a regular appointment and because the Rules of 1975 would have overriding effect over the relevant service rules, the incumbent appointed under the Rules of 1975 is not required to be screened under such Rules. In present case, respondents at the maximum would keep petitioner on daily-wage basis for initial period of two years i.e. from the date of initial appointment on 15.10.1996 till she completed two years, but immediately on completion of two years of service she was entitled to be granted semi-permanent status and in that situation she would be entitled to regular pay scale. In result, this writ petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to grant semi-permanent status to petitioner with effect from 15.10.1998, the date on which she completed two years of service, and thereafter grant her permanent status on completion of 10 years of service. The petitioner shall also be entitled to benefit of selection scales in terms of Circular dated 25.01.1992 of the Government on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years SBCWP2136/1997 // 5 // of service also from the date of conferring upon her status of semi-permanent i.e. 15.10.1998. Compliance of the judgment be made within a period of three months from the date its copy is produced before respondents. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//