1 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.696/2007. (KISHAN LAL & ORS. VS. STATE & ORS.) DATE OF ORDER : 15.07.2008. HON'BLE MR. GOVIND MATHUR, J. Mr. Rakesh Arora for the petitioner. Mr. Shyam Ladrecha for the respondents. The petitioners by way of filing a writ petition before this Court (SBCWP No.2992/1994) claimed for regularization for services from the date the persons junior to them were regularized in services. The petition for writ aforesaid came to be disposed of by this Court on 04.08.1997 in following terms : “In this case it is the admitted position of the respondents that those who had joined the services after the petitioners have been regularized in service through, the respondents contend that this was done on account of the order of this court. If the respondents have suffered a judgment for the juniors and have regularized them, then there is no cause that why they should not do the same for the seniors because the seniors would stand on the better footing and that stand of the respondents have been accepted 2 by this court in relation to the juniors, then, seniors have better right to be regularized. In this view of the fact, a direction is issued that the same treatment should be given to the petitioners as has been given to the juniors under the order of this court.” In pursuant to the order aforesaid, the District Education Officer (Secondary -I), Nagaur passed an order dated 19.03.1998 regularizing the services of the petitioners from the date the persons junior to them were regularized. The consequential benefits were also allowed to the petitioners from the date the same were given to the persons junior. A notice dated 24.07.1998 was served upon the petitioners to change the date for extending consequential benefits including fixation of pay and the grant of arrears from 04.12.1990 to 10.08.1994, the date on which SBCWP No.2992/194 was presented by the petitioners before this Court. In response to the notice dated 24.07.1998, the respondents represented before the District Education Officer (Secondary-I) that the consequential benefits including fixation of pay and grant of arrears is required to be extended to them w.e.f. 15.11.1990 as the same were extended to the persons junior. The respondent District Education Officer under an order dated 24.08.1998 rejected claim of the 3 petitioners and ordered for extending of all consequential benefits w.e.f. 10.08.1994. Being aggrieved by the order dated 10.08.1994, some of the persons similarly situated with the petitioners and who were also party to the proceedings as petitioners in SBCWP No.2992/1994 preferred a petition for writ before this Court being SBCWP No.2415/2000. The writ petition aforesaid came to be accepted on 23.05.2001 by setting aside the order dated 24.08.1998. An appeal giving challenge to the order dated 23.05.2001 also came to be rejected by Division Bench of this Court on 15.07.2003. The respondents have given all benefits as a consequent to regularization of the services with the petitioners in SBCWP No.2415/2000 w.e.f. 15.11.1990, however, the same have not been extended to the petitioners, as they did not choose to file a petition for writ to challenge the order dated 24.08.1998. By this petition for writ, the petitioners are claiming for extension of the same benefits as given to the persons similarly situated to them and who preferred the writ petition bearing No.2415/2000. 4 A reply to the writ petition has been filed by the respondents stating therein that the present petitioners were not party to the writ proceedings (SBCWP No.2415/2000) and, therefore, they are not entitled to get any benefit as claimed. Having considered the arguments advanced and from perusal of the judgment dated 23.05.2001, I am convenienced that the respondents erred while not extending the benefits to the petitioners as given to the persons similarly situated. By the order dated 23.05.2001, this Court quashed the order dated 24.08.1998 in its totality, as such, the order changing the date regarding extension of consequential benefits is no more in existence. Consequential thereto, the date i.e. 15.11.1990 for extending consequential benefits to the petitioners stands restored and the petitioners, thus, are entitled for getting all consequential benefits of regularization of their services w.e.f. 15.11.1990. Beside above, no distinction could have been made by the respondents while making fixation of pay and grant of arrears including the other consequential benefits viz. - a – viz. the persons similarly situated to them. Hence, this petition for writ deserves acceptance, same, therefore, is allowed. The respondents are directed to grant same service benefits including pay, arrears of pay etc. as 5 has been given vide order dated 07.02.2004 in pursuant to the directions given in SBCWP No.2415/2000 to the persons similarly situated to the petitioners. No order to cost. (GOVIND MATHUR)J. Anil/