SBCWP5858/2010 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5858/2010 Smt. Rekha Vs. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner and Others Date of Order ::: 29.04.2010 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Dr. Vikram Singh Nain, Counsel for petitioner #### By the Court:- Petitioner was appointed as Teacher against quota of divorced women on 26.03.2006. She has approached this Court with grievance that with effect from 20.01.2006 the respondents have introduced a new system of paying salary, according to which a fixed remuneration of Rs.4450/- was to be paid for a period of two years, whereas, prior to that date, appointments were made in regular pay scale from the date of initial appointment itself. Learned counsel cited the Government notification dated 30.02.2007 and argued that a relaxation was made in those cases where appointment orders were issued prior to 20.01.2006 except to some of the selectees because of the stay orders of Court or any other justified reasons, appointments of such SBCWP5858/2010 // 2 // remaining selectees will be governed under the provisions of the various Rules in force prior to 20.01.2006. The learned counsel also cited the case of one Smt. Shanta Devi, who was granted benefit under that Rules despite the fact that date of joining was 06.02.2006. When pointedly asked, the learned counsel could not give date of appointment of Smt. Shanta Devi. Moreover, the notification dated 13.02.2007 introduces Note (VI) below the Rule 8 of the Rajasthan Service (Amendment) Rules, 2007, to show that where recruitment process was completed and appointment orders were issued prior to 20.01.2006, the appointment of such remaining selectees will be governed under the provisions of various rules in force prior to 20.01.2006 except to some of the selectees because of stay orders of Court or any other justified reasons. In other words, the aforesaid amendment clearly recognize the fact in cases where appointment orders have been issued prior to 20.01.2006 who could not be given effect on account of various reasons including the stay orders of court or any other justified reasons, in their cases their appointments would be governed by the provisions of various rules in force prior to 20.01.2006. If in the case of Shanta Devi the SBCWP5858/2010 // 3 // appointment order was issued prior to 20.01.2006, the date of appointment would be relevant. In petitioner's case admittedly decree of divorce was passed on 16.02.2006 which date itself comes after 20.01.2006 and on account thereof appointment order was issued on 20.01.2006. I do not find any merit in this writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//