CW 6238/06 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6238/06 Brijesh Chaturvedi Versus State & Anr. DATE OF ORDER : 08/09/2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. Y.C. Sharma, for petitioner Mr. J.K. Agrawal, Addl. Govt. Counsel, for State *** Instant petition has been filed by petitioner with the grievance that he has not been granted the benefit of second selection scale despite the fact that he has completed more than 18 yrs. of service from the day he joined government service in July, 1987. Petitioner initially joined service as Stock Assistant through open selection on 14th July, 1987 in the department of Sheep & Wool. While holding the said post, the post of Surveyor [Amin] was advertised by the department of Settlement Commissioner on which the petitioner was selected through open selection and was appointed as Surveyor [Amin] vide order dt.24th June, 1992 and after tendering his resignation joined service as Surveyor on 23rd July, 1992, however, the respondents passed order on 27th April, 1994 in exercise of power under R.208(b) of Rajasthan Service Rules treating the past service rendered by him as Stock Assistant as CW 6238/06 [2] qualifying service for the purpose of pension. However, the petitioner was granted first selection scale vide order Ann.3 dt.1st July, 1998 w.e.f. 14th July, 1996 on completion of 9 yrs. of service. Taking his first appointment in the service of the government from July, 1987 but when he was not considered for second selection scale, petitioner served a legal notice and approached this court by filing instant petition. His only grievance is that as he joined service initially in the government in July, 1987 and has completed more than 18 yrs. of service but the benefit of second selection scale on completion of 18 yrs. of service has not been extended to him by the respondents in view of circular of the government dt.25th January, 1992. Respondents have filed reply to the writ petition along with a letter Ann.R/1 dt.8th December, 2005 has been placed on record, which clearly clinches the issue that once the petitioner resigned from service from the post of Stock Assistant and joined service as Surveyor [Amin] in Settlement department in July, 1992 atleast for the purpose of grant of selection scale he will be entitled to be considered on completion of 9 & 18 yrs. of service from the date he initially joined service as Surveyor i.e. CW 6238/06 [3] 23rd July, 1992. In the instant case, however granting him benefit under R.208(b) of the rules treating the past service rendered as qualifying service for the purpose of pension will not be of any significance so far as grant of second selection scale is concerned. It was observed that petitioner infact is entitled for grant of first selection scale w.e.f. 23rd July, 2001 and second selection scale on 23rd July, 2010 and granting him the benefit of 1st selection scale on completion of 9 yrs. of service from 14th July, 1996 is erroneous, but no order has been passed by the respondents so far. It might be possible because of pendency of writ petition. There is no dispute on the issue that the petitioner is eligible for selection scale in terms of circular of the government dt.25th January, 1992 from the date of initial appointment, but in the instant case, petitioner joined department of Settlement as Surveyor [Amin] through open selection on 23rd July, 1992. As such, he will be considered for selection scale on completion of 9 yrs. and 18 yrs. of service from the date he initially joined service as Surveyor [Amin]. As regards service which he rendered as Stock Assistant in the department of Sheep & Wool might CW 6238/06 [4] be taken note of as pensionable service, but certainly it could not be considered as service for the purpose of grant of selection scale in terms of circular of the government dt.25th January, 1992 and since second selection scale as he joined service as Surveyor [Amin] still has not become due to him as observed by the respondents will make him entitle in near future. This court finds no substance to interfere in the instant petition, the same stands dismissed. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. FRBOHRA6238CW06 8-9.doc