1 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3114/2001 Arun Kumar Mathur. vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corp. & ors. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3114/2001 Arun Kumar Mathur. vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corp. and others. Date : 15.5.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.Harish Purohit, for the petitioner. Mr.PK Lohra, for the respondents. - - - - - Heard learned counsel for the parties. According to the petitioner, he was initially posted on the post of Conductor and then he was selected on the post of LDC. It is submitted that the pay scale of Conductor and LDC was same at that time. The petitioner then is working as LDC since 25.4.1988. Then option was sought from the existing employees so that they may get the benefit of new pay scale. The petitioner opted for the old pay scale and when the petitioner reached to the pay of Rs.1120/- then the petitioner was given additional jump in increment and thereby the 2 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3114/2001 Arun Kumar Mathur. vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corp. & ors. petitioner started getting salary of Rs.1200/-. The said jump was objected by the audit department of the respondents upon which order Annex.3 was issued by the respondents withdrawing that benefit of jump increment. Said decision was challenged by the employees before this Court and this Court in the case of Rakesh Kumar Pathak vs. R.S.R.T.C. and anr. reported in 1997 WLC (Raj.) UC 23, held that subsequent order refixing pay of petitioners to disadvantage of petitioners is contrary to Regulations and is, therefore, liable to be set aside. This Court held that the petitioners are entitled to continue to get the fixation benefit as awarded prior to the subsequent order under challenge as existing employee. No other point has been raised by the petitioner. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner's case is squarely covered by the decision rendered in the case of Rakesh Kumar Pathak (supra). Learned counsel for the respondents tried to distinguish the case of the petitioner with the 3 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3114/2001 Arun Kumar Mathur. vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corp. & ors. help of judgment delivered in the case of Bal Mukund Sharma & Ors. vs. R.S.R.T.C. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2623/1996) decided on 13.10.2003. I considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the aforesaid judgments. The judgment delivered in the case of Bal Mukund Sharma (supra) had entirely different controversy than the controversy raised by the petitioner in this writ petition. In fact, the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the decision rendered in the case of Ramesh Kumar Pathak (supra). In view of the above, the present writ petition is allowed and the order Annex.3 is quashed and set aside. The amount which has been recovered in pursuance of Annex.3 be paid to the petitioner. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. S.Phophaliya