CW 5906/93 Nakhshtra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr . Judgment dt.13.3.09 1/5 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5906/1993 Nakhshtra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. Date of Order : 13th March, 2009 PRESENT HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr. S.L. Jain for the the petitioner. Mr. Yashpal Khileri, Dy. Government Counsel. --------- 1. By this writ petition, the petitioner claimed promotion to the post of Lower Divisional Clerk against 15% quota when he passed his Secondary School Examination in the year 1977. 2. The case of the petitioner is that his case for promotion to the post of LDC has not been considered ever since even though he had passed Secondary School Examination against the vacancies available to the respondents from the year 1991 and thereafter. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. S.L. Jain brings to the notice of this Court that similar writ petitions were decided by this Court way back in the year 1990 with the following directions to the respondents. One such order is passed in the case of `Udai Ram Damor Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr. - D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3031/1988 decided on 15.3.1990. The operative part of the said order is reproduced here for ready reference:- “Both the parties submit that this case is squarely covered b a single bench decision of this Court rendered in S.B.C.W.Pet.No.3030/88 Narain Lal Vs. State and Ors. decided on 14/3/90 and, CW 5906/93 Nakhshtra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr . Judgment dt.13.3.09 2/5 therefore, it may also be ordered in terms of the aforesaid decision. Accordingly, this writ petition partially succeeds, the petitioner being a Class IV and qualified, is eligible and has a right to be considered for promotion to the post of L.D.C. according to r.7(3) of the Raj. Subordinate Offices Ministerial Staff Rules, 1957 and the respondents are directed to consider his case for promotion to the post of L.D.C. within a period of three months from today. His request for grant of equal pay for equal work is rejected and he is directed to raise this disputed question of fact as an industrial dispute before the appropriate forum through the appropriate Government. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly on merits.” 3. On 17.1.2008, this Court after hearing both the parties passed the following order:- “The learned counsel for the respondents during the course of arguments produced copy of notification dtd.30.11.1994 published on 5.12.1994 by which amendment was introduced in Rules and it was provided that existing Field Worker, Superior Field Worker and Cholera Worker appointed upto 2.1.1992 shall be re- designated as Health Worker (Male) and absorbed as such irrespective of whether they are Matric or Non Matric provided that they have undergone CW 5906/93 Nakhshtra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr . Judgment dt.13.3.09 3/5 three months training as Health Worker. The learned counsel for the respondents, therefore, submits that the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the case of Narayan Lal V/s The State of Rajasthan delivered in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3030/1988 on 14.3.1990 will not apply to the case of the present petitioner and he cannot be considered for promotion to the post of LDC. This contention is controverted by the learned counsel for the petitioner saying that the petitioner was never absorbed as Health Worker (Male) in pursuance of notification dtd.30.11.1994. The counsel for the petitioner is, therefore, directed to file an additional affidavit showing as to whether he was ever absorbed as Health Worker (Male) or not or whether he had undergone three months' training as Health Worker in pursuance of aforesaid amendment. At the same time, the learned counsel for the respondents is also directed to file an additional affidavit showing the status of absorption of the petitioner in pursuance of said amendment. Both these affidavits may be filed within a period of two weeks from today. Put up after two weeks.” CW 5906/93 Nakhshtra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr . Judgment dt.13.3.09 4/5 4. Neither of the parties have filed additional affidavits as directed in the order dated 17.11.2008 quoted above. 5. Be that as it may since the learned counsel for the respondents has not been able to distinguish the case of the petitioners whose writ petitions were decided by this Court as above, this Court is inclined to pass similar directions in the present case as well. 6. Consequently this writ petition is also disposed of in the same terms as decided earlier by this court quoted above. 7. Accordingly this writ petition is disposed of with the directions to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of LDC in accordance with Rule 7(3) of the Rajasthan Subordinate Offices Ministerial Staff Rules, 1957 from the year 1991 onwards whenever such vacancies of LDC became available to the respondent and if the petitioner is found to be otherwise eligible for promotion to the said post his case may also be similarly considered as directed in other cases by this Court. If the petitioner is found eligible to the promotion against such vacancies of the year 1991 onwards, he may be so promoted and he shall also be entitled to all the consequential benefits. 8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as CW 5906/93 Nakhshtra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr . Judgment dt.13.3.09 5/5 to costs. [ DR. VINEET KOTHARI ], J. item No.8 babulal/-