CW 6993/06 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.6993/2006 Pyare Lal Jatav Versus State & Ors. Date of Order ::: 07/01/09 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Chiranjilal Saini, for petitioner. Dr. Mahesh Gupta, Addl. Govt. Counsel for respondents-State Instant petition has been filed assailing order dt.11/12/02 (Ann.11) whereby petitioner was deprived of his consideration on completion of 15 years of service from the date, he joined service as work-charged Mistry on 13/07/1971. Petitioner was initially appointed as daily wages employee and later on as work- charged Mistry vide order dt.13/07/71 (Ann.1) and after completion of 10 years service, he was made permanent w.e.f. 01/08/81 U/r 3(2) of the Work-charged Employees' Service Rules, 1964 (“Rules, 1964”) vide order dt.24/02/1984; and thereafter was also granted benefit of selection scale on completion of 15 years of work-charged service vide order dt.21/02/92 (Ann.3). State Government vide notification dt. 25/01/92 extended benefit of selection scales on completion of 9/18/27 years to its employees including those who were in work-charged cadre – CW 6993/06 //2// on the basis whereof petitioner submitted a representation for grant of selection scales on his completion of 9/18/27 years of services but the respondent authority communicated vide order dt.26/05/99 (Ann.7) that he being appointed on regular basis vide order dt. 25/07/95 (Ann.5); as such services rendered prior to 25/07/95 would not considered for the purposes of selection scale, which was assailed by petitioner in Appeal-2313/1999 and decided by Tribunal (respondent-2) vide judgment dt. 03/04/2002 while setting aside order dt.26/05/99 in regard to recovery of excess payment if any made as against petitioner but further directed him to submit representation raising his grievance to the competent authority which may decide as to from which date, he would be considered for the purposes for grant of selection scale. Petitioner made representation (Ann.8) which has been decided by respondents vide order dt.11/12/02 (Ann.11) holding that no recovery can be made from the petitioner but it was observed that since petitioner was appointed as Mistry on regular basis vide order dt. 25/07/95, from which date only, selection scale on completion of 15 years of service pursuant to State Government order dt.23/01/85 is CW 6993/06 //3// admissible. To this extent, petitioner is aggrieved of the order impugned (Ann.11). Counsel for petitioner inter-alia submits that petitioner was appointed in a regular establishment as work-charged Mistry vide order dt.13/07/1971 and was made permanent on completion of 10 years of service w.e.f. 01/08/81 vide order dt.24/02/84 U/r 3(2) of Work-charged Rules, 1964; as such merely on account of having passed an order of his regular service as Mistry at a later stage on 25/07/95 – in the absence of earlier order being revoked/ cancelled by authority, his regular services as work-charged Mistry has to be given effect from initial entry into service from 13/07/71 for the purposes of grant of selection scale admissible on completion of 15 years of service pursuant to State Government order dt.23/01/85; as such denying the petitioner from selection scale admissible on completion of 15 years of service vide order impugned (Ann.11) from initial entry as work-charged Mistry (13/07/71) but granting it only with effect from a later stage (25/07/95) is not legally sustainable. In their reply, respondents have inter- alia averred that since petitioner was appointed on regular basis on 25/07/95 (Ann.5), his CW 6993/06 //4// services rendered prior thereto would not be given effect to for the purposes of grant of selection scale. It has further been averred that this controversy is pending consideration before Apex Court – reference whereof has been made in document (Ann.R/1). I have considered contentions of Counsel for the parties and with their assistance examined the material on record. A bare look at the initial appointment order dt.13/07/71 (Ann.1) shows that petitioner was appointed in a pay scale as regular Mistry in the work-charged establishment and on completion of 10 years of his satisfactory service, he was made permanent w.e.f. 01/08/81 vide order dt.24/02/84 (Ann.2). Nothing has been placed by respondents on record to show that orders (Ann.1 & 2, ibid) by which he was regularly appointed as work-charged Mistry and so also of his permanent appointment w.e.f.01/08/81, have been revoked by respondents at a later stage. Making the basis of order dt. 25/07/95 (Ann.5) treating him to be regularly appointed Mistry in no manner will obliterate his services rendered prior thereto (25/07/95) for the claim of selection scale, to which he was legally entitled for from the date of regular entry into work-charged service, as well CW 6993/06 //5// pursuant to order dt.13/07/71 (Ann.1). As regards order of Apex Court (Ann.R/1) placed on record alongwith reply to the petition, it has no application in the facts of instant case. Controversy raised earlier for consideration, as informed to this Court, was as to whether adhoc services rendered by employees can be considered for the purpoes of selection scales in terms of Govt. order dt.25/01/92. In instant case, case set up by petitioner for consideration is that having been initially appointed on regular basis in work- charge cadre, his services were neither adhoc nor temporary which he rendered in work-charged establishment from 13/07/71 to 25/07/95; in such circumstances, in the opinion of this Court, action of respondents in obliterating the services rendered by petitioner from 13/07/71 for grant of selection scales in no manner can be held to be justified and order dt.11/12/02 (Ann.11) treating petitioner's service only from regular appointment order dt.25/07/95 (Ann.5) for grant of selection scale is not legally sustainable and deserves to be set aside. Consequently, writ petition succeeds and is hereby allowed. Order dt.11/12/02 (Ann.11) is hereby set aside and order dt.21/02/92 (Ann.3) CW 6993/06 //6// is restored. Respondents are directed to consider the petitioner to be regularly appointed vide order dt.13/07/71 (Ann.1) for grant of selection scale admissible on completion of 15 years of work-charged service pursuant to Govt. order dt.23/01/85, as well and and further for grant of selection scales admissible on completion of 9/18/27 years of service in terms of order dt.25/01/92 alongwith consequential benefits flowing therefrom and due arrears be computed and compliance be made within three months. No costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p.6/6993CW06-SlScl-7Jn.doc