1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.8287/2006. : : Ramavtar Gupta Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. : : Date of Order 1.4.2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. Sandeep Saxena for the petitioner. Mr. Pradeep Kalwania, Addl.Govt.Counsel for the State. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer that order of respondents dated 16.10.2003 by which consequential benefits, in terms of judgment of this Court dated 14.12.1998 passed in his earlier writ petition being SB Civil Writ Petition No.6231/1993, has been declined on the premise that there was no specific direction for promotion, be quashed and set aside and the respondents be directed to give all consequential benefits including the benefit of promotion to the petitioner and accordingly make his pay fixation and release arrear, gratuity and other monetary benefits with interest @ 18% per annum. 2 3. Contention of Shri Sandeep Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner entered into the services of respondents as LDC in the year 1955 and was promoted as UDC. He was posted at Panchayat Samiti, Hindon on deputation. Petitioner passed Accounts Clerks Examination in the year 1958, therefore, he was working as Accounts Clerk. He was placed under suspension by order dated 6.11.1975 on account of alleged fabrication of certain record of Panchayat Samiti, Todabhim. He was later served with charge-sheet under Rule 16 of CCA Rules, 1958 on 4.3.1976 with the same charge. A criminal case was also registered against petitioner. For this reason, the District Collector, Sawai Madhopur decided not to hold disciplinary proceedings against petitioner even than petitioner continued under suspension. Petitioner, therefore, filed a writ petition being SB Civil Writ Petition No.3311/1989, the same was decided by this Court on 24.1.1991 with direction that enquiry against petitioner should be disposed of in six weeks and that petitioner would be entitled to annual grade increment even during the period of suspension, accordingly his pay should be fixed under the revised pay scale rules. In the meantime, petitioner was acquitted in criminal case. Petitioner, therefore, filed writ petition being SB Civil Writ 3 Petition No.4772/1991 challenging the order of his suspension. This Court by its judgment dated 2.2.1993 quashed the order of suspension with direction to reinstate petitioner in service with all monetary benefits. Petitioner was accordingly reinstated in service by order dated 1.6.1993. In the meantime, cadre of Accounts Clerk was abolished in the year 1995 and those persons, who were working as Accounts Clerk were appointed as Junior Accountant and became the members of service of Rajasthan Accounts Sub-ordinate Service. Petitioner was under the order passed by Special Secretary of Government, Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur posted with Panchayat Samiti, Dholpur against the post of Junior Accountant in his own pay scale. After attaining the age of superannuation he retired on 31.7.1995. Since petitioner was not granted benefit as was extended to his fellow Accounts Clerk, who became member of Rajasthan Accounts Sub-Ordinate Service and appointed as Junior Accountant, he filed writ petition being SB Civil Writ Petition No.6231/1993. The writ petition was allowed by judgment of this Court dated 14.12.1993 with direction to respondents to make payment with all consequential benefits to the petitioner because the respondents themselves dropped the criminal enquiry against 4 him on 11.12.1998. It is contended that sole reason for which petitioner was not appointed as Junior Accountant and was not made member of Rajasthan Accounts Sub-Ordinate Service was pendency of departmental enquiry against petitioner, which respondents themselves decided to drop. The writ petition, was filed with specific prayer that respondents be directed to give all benefits about promotion on the post of Junior Accountant and writ petition was allowed. The respondents are, therefor, under obligation to comply with the same. It is, therefore, prayed that writ petition be allowed in terms as prayed. 4. Shri Pradeep Kalwania, learned Additional Government Counsel has opposed the writ petition and submitted that this Court in its order dated 14.12.1998 while deciding SB Civil Writ Petition No.6231/1993 did not make any direction with regard to promotion or promotional benefits to be given to petitioner. All the outstanding pension and salary has been paid to petitioner and post pensionary benefits are being paid. This Court did not require the respondents to include petitioner in the Accounts Service cadre, therefore, the same has been declined. Learned counsel submitted that since petitioner was under suspension 5 at that time, he could not be made Junior Accountant and member of Rajasthan Accounts Sub-Ordinate Service with all consequential benefits. Rate of interest as earlier granted i.e. 18% per annum appears to be on higher side, therefore, the same be reduced. 5. Consideration of arguments aforesaid and perusal of material on record show that petitioner was placed under suspension on 6.11.1975. He was facing both criminal trial and disciplinary proceedings. He was acquitted by this Court in the criminal trial. When the petitioner filed writ petition in 1991 (SBCWP No.4772/1991) challenging order of continued suspension for 17 years. This writ petition was allowed by judgment dated 2.2.1993. Suspension order was quashed and respondents were directed to reinstate petitioner in service and pay all monetary benefits together with fixation of pay, increments and allowances of the said period. Respondent reinstated petitioner, but simultaneously preceded against him in the disciplinary enquiry. Petitioner had to, therefore, file another writ petition being SB Civil Writ Petition No.6231/1993. Petitioner in the meantime attained the age of superannuation on 31.7.1995. His retiral benefits were paid deeming him to have retired from the post of 6 Accounts Clerk. Petitioner then filed SB Civil Writ Petition No.6231/1993 with the following prayers :- “(i) The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleaded to call for the entire record of the case and after examining the same be pleased to quash and set aside the charge sheet dated nil which was served upon the petitioner on 4th March, 1976 under Rule 16 of CCA Rules of 1958 and the respondents be directed to give all consequential benefits to the petitioner including promotions/appointments on the post of Junior Accountant/Accountant and Assistant Accounts Officer from the date persons similarly situated have been given promotions. (ii) Any prejudicial order to the interest of the petitioner, if passed during the pendency of the writ petition, the same may kindly be taken on record and be quashed and set aside. (iii) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which may be considered just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be passed in favour of the petitioner. (iv) Cost of the writ petition may be awarded in favour of the petitioner.” The respondents in the said writ petition informed the Court that disciplinary enquiry against petitioner has been 7 dropped by order dated 11.12.1998. This Court thereupon disposed of the said writ petition with the following directions :- “That Shri K. N. Gupta learned counsel appearing for the respondents placed on record the order dated December 11, 1998 whereby the departmental enquiry pending against the petitioner has been quashed and a direction also been issued in respect of payment of pensionary benefits to the petitioner. In view of the said order, nothing remains to be decided in the writ petition. The respondents are directed to make payment of pensionary benefits with all consequential benefits to the petitioner within one month from today. The petitioner shall also be entitled to the interest @ 18% per annum. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.” The order disposing of aforesaid writ petition dated 14.12.1998 obviously was passed in the context of prayer raised in the writ petition, which also included prayer with regard to payment of consequential benefits including promotion on the post of Junior Accounts/Accountant and Assistant Accounts Officer from the date similarly situated 8 have been given promotion. This Court while disposing of writ petition further directed respondents to make payment of pensionary benefits with all consequential benefits to petitioner within one month. Although it may be true that there was no separate direction for granting the benefit of promotion etc, but this was implicit in the word “consequential benefits” and that was what petitioner had prayed in the writ petition. Contention of respondents that there was no specific direction for promotion/appointment on the post of Junior Accounts and further promotion as Assistant Accounts Officer and Accounts Officer is, therefore, not acceptable. But then, the respondents would have to undertake the exercise of first making petitioner member of Rajasthan Accounts Sub-Ordinate Service thereby appointing him as Junior Accountant and further make promotion on the post of Accountant and Assistant Accounts Officer with reference to the date on which his juniors were promoted. Even if such direction was not mentioned in so many words in the order of this Court in 14.12.1998, but the spirit of that order would carry the same meaning if read alongwith prayer made in the writ petition. The order passed by this Court has attained finality since the respondents have not challenged the same. 9 6. Having regard to the facts of the case, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to consider case of petitioner for his appointment as Junior Accountant thereby makes him member of Rajasthan Accounts Sub- Ordinate Service Rules, 1975 and further direction to consider his case for promotion on the post of Accountant and thereafter Assistant Accounts Officer. If petitioner is adjudged suitable, grant him promotion on the aforesaid posts. Respondents are required to pay interest to petitioner with all consequential benefits @ 6% per annum. Compliance of the judgment be made within a period of three months from the date copy of its produced before the respondents. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.30.