1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.9181/02 Anand Singh vs. State & Ors. Date of order : 20/2/2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Manoj Pareek for the petitioner. Shri Ganesh Meena, Government Counsel for the respondents. ****** This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer that the respondents be directed to grant him benefit of third selection scale on his completing 27 years of service and also be directed to revise pay scale pursuant to Revised Pay Scale Rules with effect from 1.9.1996. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited attention of the Court towards the communication dated 17.9.2002 addressed by the Director and Inspector General (Prisons) to Deputy Superintendent, District Jail, Jhunjhunu by which the case of the petitioner was forwarded for grant of third selection scale and benefits of Revised Pay Scale Rules of 1998 and it was directed that duly filled in proforma with service book of the petitioner be got completed and forwarded for appropriate sanction. He then 2 referred to the communicated dated 18.9.2002 which was addressed to the petitioner by Dy. Superintendent, District Jail, Jhunjhunu communicating that the sanction orders for paying him benefit of third selection scale on completion of 27 years of service and the Revised Pay Scale Rules, 1998 have been received. He should therefore submit 10 photographs of both husband and wife and duly filled in application form for leave encashment so that his case for pension and leave encashment can be proceed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in response to the aforesaid communication, the petitioner completed necessary formalities but so far nothing has been done and the petitioner is yet to receive the benefits of third selection scale and Revised Pay Scale Rules of 1998. Notice of this writ petition was issued to the respondents on 31.1.2003 but so far the respondents have chosen not to file reply to the writ petition and the learned Deputy Government Counsel would again today pray for adjournment for the purpose. In the facts of the case, it is clearly evident 3 that the petitioner has already suffered a lot for inaction on the part of the respondents. He retired on 31.12.1996 and is yet to get the benefits of third selection scale and the Revised Pay Scale of 1996. The petitioner when he filed writ petition was 65 years and now with the passage of a period, 7 more years have gone by and he has attained the age of 72 years. However, there is a communication has been addressed to this Court by Dy. Superintendent, District Jail, Jhunjhunu dated 27.4.2006 with certain documents which are on record. According to this, the benefit of selection scale on completion of 27 years was sanctioned to the petitioner by order dated 17.9.2002 and entry to this effect was made in his service record. Also is on record, is the letter dated 9.6.2003 addressed by Assistant Director of Directorate of Pension to the Dy. Superintendent, District Jail, Jhunjhunu according to which the pension case of the petitioner has been finalised and it was directed that the service book of the petitioner was being returned back. Necessary correction in the PPO /GPO of the 4 petitioner being made and the same be forwarded so that revised PPO may be issued to the petitioner. Benefit of selection scale was the legitimate due of the petitioner which could not be finalised even after more than five years of the date of his retirement and till date it is also not known whether the payment of revised pension has been issued to the petitioner. Having regard to the facts of the case, the respondents are directed to pay all the arrears to the petitioner towards the payment of his third selection scale and also the revised pension and leave encashment if not already paid. The petitioner shall be entitled to interest at the rate of 9% per annum in terms of Rule 89 of the Rajasthan Civil Services Pension Rules, 1996 for delay on all the aforesaid dues including the revised pension. Compliance of the judgement be made within a period of two months from the date its copy is produced before the respondents. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/