[1] DB REVIEW PET 4/2004 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R D.B. CIVIL REVIEW PETITION NO. 4/2004 IN D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO. 827/1997 IN S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3183/1996 RAM SHANKER BHARDWAJ Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Date: 04.03.2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK Mr. D.P. Sharma, Advocate for appellant/petitioner. Mr. S.K. Singhal, Advocate for respondents. **** The review-petitioner/appellant had preferred an appeal before the Rajasthan Non- Government Educational Institution Tribunal, Jaipur (for short 'the Tribunal') and the same was dismissed by the Tribunal vide judgment/order dated 12.04.1996. Against the said judgment of the Tribunal, the petitioner had preferred a writ petition before this Court which was registered as S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3183/1996 and the same came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 07.10.1996. Against the order dated 07.10.1996, the petitioner had also preferred a review petition before the Single Bench and the same was also dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 07.01.1997 as no error or illegality was found in the order passed by the Tribunal. [2] DB REVIEW PET 4/2004 Against the order dated 07.10.1996 read with order dated 07.01.1997 passed by the learned Single Judge, the petitioner/appellant had preferred special appeal before this Court and the same was registered as D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 827/1997. In the aforesaid appeal, the Division Bench has considered that the appellant had been appointed in the year 1985 on consolidated pay. While he was continuing in service, the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institution Act, 1989 came into force and the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institution Rules, 1993 thereunder also came into force. The appellant had moved an application before the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institution Tribunal, Jaipur with the prayer that he should be paid his salary in the pay- scales at par with the employees of the Government of Rajasthan. Section 29 of the Act of 1989 deals with the cases of aided institutions. It was not disputed before the Division Bench that the institution in question in which the appellant is employed i.d. Shri Govind Deo Educational Institute is recognised body and not aided by the Government. Thus, on the basis of the provisions of Section 16 and Section 29 of the Act of 1989, it is clear that there is no provision for providing the pay-scales in the Non- Governmental institutions which are not aided. [3] DB REVIEW PET 4/2004 In view of the provisions of Section 29 of the Act of 1989, the Division Bench has observed that the appellant had no claim for the grant of pay-scale at par with those prevailing in the Government because the provisions as aforesaid deal with the cases of aided institutions only. It was also observed that petitioner's application was rejected before the Tribunal against which the appellant preferred the writ petition before this Court and the same was dismissed summarily by the learned Single Judge; and the review petition filed against the same had also been rejected. On merits, the Division Bench found that the petitioner has no claim for grant of pay-scale since 1985 because he had been appointed on consolidated pay and that was accepted by him and after coming into force of the Rules, he is being paid in the pay-scales Rs. 2000- 3500. With the above observations, the special appeal filed by the appellant/review-petitioner came to be dismissed by the Division Bench vide judgment dated 19.02.2002. The present review petition has been preferred by the appellant/review-petitioner re- agitating the same arguments as were raised before the Tribunal and the learned Single Judge as well as before the Division Bench. We have carefully gone through the order passed by the Tribunal dated 12.04.1996, the order dated 07.10.1996 read with order dated 07.01.1997 [4] DB REVIEW PET 4/2004 passed by the learned Single Judge in the writ petition and in the review petition respectively and the judgment dated 19.02.2002 passed in the special appeal by the Division Bench. After thoroughly going through the judgment passed by the Division Bench in the special appeal, it appears that the claim of the petitioner has been denied as the appellant/review-petitioner has claimed regular pay scale since 1985 which has rightly been denied by the Division Bench as well as by the learned Single Judge and the Tribunal as the appellant had been appointed on consolidated pay and after commencement of the Rules, he is being paid in the pay-scale of Rs. 2000-3500. Thus, we find no good reason to interfere with the judgment passed by the Division Bench as there is no illegality or error apparent on the face of the record and in view of the settled preposition of law, no case of review is made out. In the result, the review petition fails being devoid of merit and the same is hereby dismissed with the cost of Rs. 1,000/-. (SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK),J. (K.S. RATHORE),J. /KKC/