CWP 1427/95 //1// IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR. O R D E R CI VI L W RI T PETI TI ON NO.1 4 2 7 / 1 9 9 5 RAJENDRA PRA. JAI N VS. STATE & ORS Dat e of Or der ::: 1 7 / 0 2 / 0 9 HON'BLE MR. JUSTI CE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. Kamal Parswal for Mr.Nitin Jain, for petitioner. Ms. Sunita Agarwal, for Mr.G.K.Garg, for respondents. Mr. Pradeep Kalwani, Addl.G.C. Instant petition has been filed by petitioner assailing order dated 01st March 1995 (Ann.11) whereby Laxmi Narain Chouhan was appointed as Junior Accountant on urgent temporary basis upto 31/ 03/ 95 or till regular selections are made on the recommendation of the promotion committee, whichever is earlier. Petitioner was a member of Rajasthan Municipal (Subordinate & Ministerial) Service Rules, 1963 (“Rules, 1963”) on having joined service as LDC pursuant to appointment order dt.15th March 1967 and was later on promoted as Upper Division Clerk. In seniority list (Ann.1) of UDC published by respondents, name of the petitioner is placed at S.No.2. It has also been informed that the petitioner has attained age of superannuation on 31st January, 2008. Grievance of the petitioner is that he too was discharging duties of Jr.Accountant and in such CWP 1427/95 //2// circumstances, while giving benefits to Laxmi Narain Chouhan vide order dt.1st March, 1995 (Ann.1), the petitioner being senior to him was also to be considered for appointment to the post of Jr. Accountant. It has been averred by respondents that so far as Laxm i Narain Chouhan is concerned, he preferred CWP-1144/ 89 which was decided vide order dt.22nd March, 1991 while this Court held that writ petitioner should get minimum salary of the post of Accounts Clerk from the date of writ petition (23/ 03/ 1989) and his services should also be regularised as accounts clerk as per Rules and in compliance whereof, he was appointed as Accounts Clerk vide order dt.21st March 99. It has also been averred that no parity could have been claimed by petitioner qua Laxm i Narain Chouhan as he was working as Accounts Clerk and fixed in minimum pay scale and his services were regularised under orders of this Court whereas petitioner was working on the post of UDC, so could be considered for further promotion either on the post of Office Assistant or Officer Superintendent as per seniority in accordance with Scheme of Rules, 1963. Petitioner was holding post of UDC on substantive basis and certainly could be considered for further promotion as per his seniority on the post of CWP 1427/95 //3// Office Assistant/ Superintendent under Scheme of Rules, 1963 and certainly could not have been considered unless fulfills conditions of eligibility to the post of Jr. Accountant under Scheme of Rules, 1963. It is not the case of the petitioner that any person junior to him in seniority list of UDC was further considered for appointment/ promotion as Jr. Accountant on account whereof, his right of fair consideration has been infringed. As regards prom otion of Laxmi Narain Chouhan to the post of Jr. Accountant vide order dt.01st March, 1995 (Ann.11), petitioner cannot claim parity since he (LN Chouhan) came with specific case before this Court in his petition that he was continuously working as Accounts Clerk for almost 15 years and after adjudication, this Court vide order dt.22nd March, 1991 directed respondents to fix him in minimum pay of Accounts Clerk and so also to regularise his services under Rules, 1963. Consequently I find no substance in the writ petition, which is hereby dismissed. No costs. (AJAY RASTOGI ) J. CKTh an v i/ 3/1427CW95-17FbCKT.doc