1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2620/1996 (Satya Narayan Bohra Vs. State & Ors.) Date of order : 10.7.2008 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr. Himmat Singh Shekhawat, for the petitioner. Mr. N.K. Mehta, Dy. Govt. Counsel. Heard learned counsel for the parties. In this case, the petitioner has prayed for direction to the respondents for considering his case of appointment on the post of L.D.C. in the light of the amendment dated 21.12.1989 made in the Rajasthan Subordinate Offices Ministerial Staff Rules, 1957 (hereafter, the rules of 1957 only). The said amendment was made by the State Government vide notification dated 21.12.1989 whereby it was provided that the persons employed on work 2 charged basis in Public Works Department/Irrigation and other Government Departments shall be absorbed once only on the post of LDC on regular basis against the vacant posts of LDC in their respective department to the extent of 50% of total vacant posts of L.D.C. on 1.4.1988 after adjudging their suitability by the committee consisting of Government officials of the department. The petitioner is claiming his relief for appointment on the post of LDC on the ground that he was initially appointed as work charged employee on 1.4.1984 and worked on the post of LDC although he was appointed on work charged basis till May 1998 in the respondent department. Therefore on the basis of his qualification, which is higher secondary with I.T.I., his case was to be considered in accordance with the said amendment for appointment on the post of L.D.C. but his case has not been considered for want of determination of vacancies as on 1.4.1989. Therefore, the petitioner is seeking interference of this Court by way of filing the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. I have perused the entire record of the case and the amendment made in the rules of 1957. I am of the opinion that the petitioner was very much entitled to be considered for appointment against the vacant post of LDC in view of the aforesaid amendment in the 3 Rules of 1957 for absorption on the post of LDC as he was eligible on the date of issuance of the notification dated 21.12.1989. The similar controversy arose before this Court in so many cases more specifically in case of Anand Roop Vs. State of Raj., reported in WLR 1992 (S) Raj 340 and in case of Naga Ram Choudhary Vs. State of Raj. & Ors., reported in WLR 1992 (S) Raj 351 wherein this Court has directed the respondents to consider the case of the persons who were possessing basic qualification for LDC in the light of the amendment made in the Rules of 1957. Para-4 of the judgment rendered in case of Anand Roop (supra) reads as follows : “4. As a result of the discussion aforesaid, the petition is partly allowed. The respondents are directed to grant the petitioner regular pay scale of Helper with effect from the date of his initial entry and to give him all consequential benefits as a result of such fixation. The respondents are further directed to consider the petitioner's case for offering him appointment as L.D.C. in terms of proviso to Rule 7 (1) (b) of the aforesaid rules of 1957 if he is otherwise eligible and the conditions for the same are fulfilled.” Para – 6 of the judgment rendered in case of Naga Ram Choudhary (supra) reads as follows : 4 “6. In the aforesaid circumstances, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to regularise the petitioner's services on the post of L.D.C. in pursuance of rules as amended by notification dated 18.12.89 as he fulfills all the conditions laid down there in within a period of three months from today. The petitioner will be placed in the regular pay scale with effect from the date his services are regularised. There will be no order as to costs.” In this view of the matter, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for absorption on the post of L.D.C in the light of notification dated 21.12.1989 and if petitioner found suitable and eligible to be absorbed on the post of LDC in view of the notification then the benefits shall be extended to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. arun