CW 2324/07 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH [1] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2324/07 Ram Kumar Singh Versus State & Anr. [2] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2510/07 Kuldeep Singh Versus State & Anr. DATE OF ORDER : 12/12/2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. Govind Gupta for Mr. Ankur Rastogi, for petitioner Mr. J.K. Agrawal, Addl. Govt. Counsel, for State *** Since common question involved in both the writ petitions, hence are being decided by the present order. Instant petitions have been filed by the petitioners seeking direction against the respondents that period of training course be treated to be on deputation and they may be paid salary of the said period. Counsel for petitioner submits that this controversy has been examined by this court in CW No.2760/88, Iqbal Ahmed Afridi Vs. State of Rajasthan, decided on 15th February, 2000 - relevant Para 8 whereof is reproduced as under: “In the result the writ petition stands allowed and respondents are directed to treat the petitioner on deputation during CW 2324/07 the period he undertook the course of General Nursing [Male] and pay him salary and compensation during the aforesaid period. The petitioner shall also be entitled to the cost of writ petition from the respondents.” It has also been considered in D.B. Special Appeal No.1468/06 which was decided on 3rd March, 2008. While accepting contention of the counsel for petitioner, it was observed that period spent by the concerned appellant during training of General Nursing shall be treated on deputation and they will be entitled for all consequential benefits – relevant Para 5 whereof is reproduced as under: “Consequently, we allow this appeal and set aside the order of the Single Judge dated 12.4.2006 and also that of Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal dated 9.6.1993 and it is declared that the time spent by the appellant from 13.3.1986 until the successful completion of 3 year general nursing course shall be treated as period on deputation. All consequential benefits will accordingly follow. The parties shall bear their own costs.” It appears from the order of Division Bench [supra] that Additional Government Advocate conceded before this court that present petitioners being similarly situated are also entitled for the period of service which they CW 2324/07 have rendered during General Nursing Course on deputation. Counsel for respondents submits that since there is no such provision under the Scheme of Rules, as such, even if period of training has been considered on deputation earlier that cannot be extended to the petitioners unless permitted under law. Suffice it to say that this court in the judgment dt.15th February, 2000 [supra] and so also Division Bench judgment dt.3rd March, 2008 [supra] examined the Scheme of Rules and finally observed that they are entitled for aforesaid benefit petitioners being similarly situated, in opinion of this court, are also entitled for same benefit extended to similarly situated persons. In the light of judgment, the controversy remains no longer res integra. Consequently, both the writ petition stand allowed. Respondents are directed to treat the petitioners on deputation during the period they CW 2324/07 undertook the course of General Nursing [Male] and they will be paid salary and other allowances during the aforesaid period with consequential benefits flowing thereof. Respondents shall ensure compliance within three months. No costs. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. FRBOHRA2324CW07 12-12.doc