1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5705/96 Girraj Prasad Sain vs. State & Ors. Date of order : 7/1/2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Abdul Hanif for the petitioner. Shri Ganesh Meena, Government Counsel for the respondents. ****** Heard the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition was filed by the petitioner Giriraj Prasad Sain, who was working with the respondents as Class IV employee. The petitioner is a handicapped person. He was claiming parity with many of his juniors, who according to him were regularised in service with effect from 4.2.1991, the date on which Shri Prahlad Chawla, who was junior to him, was regularised. Shri Prahlad Chawla filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.180/1990, which was disposed of by this Court. The learned counsel submitted that petitioner be granted the same benefits, which were granted to Shri Prahlad Chawla. The petitioner earlier filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1171/93, which was disposed 2 of by this Court by order dated 15.3.1994 with direction to provide him the pay scale from the date on which his junior persons were granted such benefits within a period of six months, yet the respondents regularised his service with effect from 1.7.1994 instead of 31.3.1988 as provided in the Government Circular dated 28.12.1989. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he should at least be granted regularisation in service with effect from 4.2.1991, on which date Shri Prahlad Chawla was regularised. Shri Ganesh Meena, learned Government Counsel opposed the writ petition and submitted that Shri Prahlad Chawla was regularised with effect from 1.7.1994 by the order dated 2.12.1994, the date on which the petitioner was regularised. There is no case of discrimination. He referred to pleadings in para 5 and 7 of the reply in support of his contentions. The learned counsel for the petitioner rejoined and submitted that subsequently Shri Prahlad Chawla filed another writ petition, which was allowed by this Court with direction to the respondents 3 to grant him regularisation in terms of the Government Circular dated 28.12.1989. Shri Prahlad Chawla too, like him was handicapped and admittedly junior to him and therefore the petitioner should have been granted the same benefits. Having regard to the facts of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the respondents enclosing therewith copy of the judgment passed in the case of Shri Prahlad Chawla within three months. If actually Shri Prahlad Chawla is found to be regularised from the earlier date, the respondents would consider granting similar benefits to the petitioner as were granted to Shri Prahlad Chawla. Representation shall be disposed of within three months from the date of its receipt. The writ petition is accordingly allowed in part. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/