CW 8156/06 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.8156/2006 Mahendra Singh Versus Regional Forest Officer & Ors. Date of Order ::: 09/02/09 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Ravi Shanker Sharma, for petitioner Mr. Chetan Bairwa, Addl. Govt. Counsel, for respondents. Instant petition has been filed by petitioner with the grievance that once he was reinstated with continuity in service & back wages in terms of Award dt.08/10/96 (Ann.1), he is entitled to be considered to seek declaration for status of semi-permanent & permanent from the date of his initial appointment (16/11/84) and not from reinstatement in service. As alleged in the petition, petitioner was initially appointed as a Cattle Guard on 16/11/84. However, his services were allegedly terminated w.e.f.01/05/89, which was assailed by way of Reference duly made by appropriate Government before Labour Court Bharatpur, which while setting aside the order of his termination, directed respondents vide Award dt.08/10/96 (Ann.1) to reinstate the workman (petitioner) with continuity in service & back wages. In pursuance whereof, petitioner was reinstated in service on 15/03/97 – which was considered as date of his appointment CW 8156/06 //2// for grant of semi-permanent status w.e.f. 01/04/99 vide order dt.21/07/2003 (Ann.2). Grievance raised by petitioner is that once he was directed to be reinstated with continuity in service & back wages in terms of the Award (Ann.1), respondents were under obligation to consider him for grant of semi-permanent & permanent status from the date of initial appointment (16/11/84) and they have committed an error in declaring him semi-permanent from date of reinstatement in service. In the reply, respondents specifically averred that they have recommended and proposal was sent to the department to consider him for grant of semi-permanent status from 01/04/86 taking note of his first appointment (16/11/84) but in absence of approval necessary orders could not have been passed. Para 6 of the reply reads ad infra: “6. That the contents of para 6 of the writ petition are replied in terms that in pursuance to the directions, issued by the department, the service record of the petitioner regarding the period, for which the petitioner actually worked, was traced and in compliance to the award dated 08/10/96, his date of semi-permanent was proposed as 01/04/86 and the letter No.11763 dated 8/11/06 was sent to the Head Of CW 8156/06 //3// Department for approval of his date from which the status of semi-permanent is proposed and the approval of the same is still awaited and action will be accordingly initiated as per the approval of the Head of Department.” Apart from what has been averred by respondents in the reply, once petitioner was reinstated with in continuity of service with back wages in terms of Award dt.08/10/96 (Ann.1), he was otherwise entitled to be considered for grant of semi- permanent/permanent status from the date of initial appointment (16/11/84) – denial whereof is in violation of Art.14 of the Constitution. Consequently, writ petition succeeds and is hereby allowed. Respondents are directed to consider the petitioner for grant of semi- permanent/permanent status from the date of initial appointment (16/11/84); and appropriate orders for consequential benefits be passed within three months. No order as to costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p.3/8156CW06-9Fb.doc