SBCWP No.5800/2000. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5800/2000. Bajrang Singh Vs. Rajasthan State Transport Corporation and ors. Date of Order:- 2/7/2008. HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Kamalkant Sharma for the petitioner. Shri N.S. Chouhan on behalf of Shri R.D. Rastogi for the respondents. ***** BY THE COURT:- Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2) This writ petition has been filed by petitioner-Bajrang Singh who was working as Conductor with the respondents-RSRTC. The petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Conductor vide order dated 19/1/1985 but his appointment was on daily wage basis. His services were subsequently terminated vide order dated 24/12/1985. Petitioner filed a civil suit. The suit was decreed vide judgment of the civil court dated 16/2/1995 and termination of the petitioner was held to be illegal and petitioner was declared continuous in service as SBCWP No.5800/2000. 2 before. Petitioner was reinstated in service on 16/2/1995 pursuant to the judgment & decree of the court aforesaid. The petitioner in between filed a writ petition before this Court claiming regular pay scale being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5830/1998 which was disposed of vide judgment dated 7/12/1998 with a liberty to the petitioner to make representation to the respondents with further directions that respondents shall decide the same within one month. In the meantime, judgment & decree of the civil court referred to above, was unsuccessfully challenged by the petitioner in first appeal, judgment of which, was challented in second appeal before this Court. The parties entered into the compromise in second appeal in the terms indicated in affidavit of the petitioner which is on record at Annexure-2. According to the contents of agreement of compromise, petitioner was to be treated continuous in service and his services would be regularised. The petitioner however would not to claim arrears of salary from the date of his removal i.e. 24/12/1985 subject to the condition that whatever amount has been received pursuant to the decree shall not be recovered by the respondents and that he would withdraw the pending execution application. The respondents on the basis of the complaint issued order dated 8/6/2000 regularising services of the petitioner. SBCWP No.5800/2000. 3 3) The petitioner has now prayed for a direction to the respondents that they should treat him continuous in service from the date of his initial appointment as per the compromise giving him regular pay scale treating him regular in service from the date of his initial appointment with a further prayer to give him arrears of salary. 4) Respondents have contested the writ petition and their contention is that the respondents have treated the petitioner continuous in service w.e.f. 6/2/2000 as per the judgment of the civil court but so far as the arrears from the date of his initial appointment is concerned, same were given up by the petitioner in the compromise (Ann.2) inasmuch as, in para 5 thereof, petitioner has clearly undertaken not to claim arrears of his past services hence, there is no question of now treating the petitioner to have been regularised in service from the date of his initial appointment because that part of relief was already abandoned by the petitioner in the said clause of the compromise. 5) Learned counsel for the petitioner has however insisted that for his period of service from the date of his initial appointment i.e. 19/1/1985 till 6/2/2000, when his services were regularised, a direction may be issued that this part shall be counted for the purpose of Gratuity, Pension, Selection Scale etc. No such direction can be given contrary to law and whatever be the relevant law on SBCWP No.5800/2000. 4 the subject as per the rules of the respondents governing the service condition of the petitioner would apply to the case of the petitioner. If, as per the law on the subject which governs the service condition of the employees of the respondents, period of service rendered on daily wage basis is countable, same shall be considered in accordance therewith by the respondents. 6) I do not find any merit in this petition in view of the compromise Annexure-2 arrived at between the petitioner and the respondents, according to which, petitioner has given up his claim for claiming arrears for his past service. Therefore, no such relief as prayed for in the instant writ petition beyond the compromise Annexure-2 can be granted in this writ petition. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil