1 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 5085/1994 (Ghanshyam Prasad Pathak Vs. Municipal Board, Bhusavar and ors.) Date of Judgment : 15/10/2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr.P.K.Sharma, for the petitioner. Mr.G.K.Garg with Mr.Vijay Jangid, for the respondents. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner claiming various reliefs but the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of subsequent developments, he has confined his claim with regard to grant of first selection scale upon completion of 9 years' of service with the respondent- Municipal Board. 3. The brief facts of the case are that when the petitioner was working as Sub- Nakedar, he was declared surplus as the octroi was abolished and he was absorbed in the Panchayati Raj Department. 2 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner was initially appointed with the respondent in the year 1975 at the rate of Rs.6/- per day and his services were retrenched vide order dated 31.5.1978. The petitioner challenged the said retrenchment before the Labour Court, which vide its award dated 11.7.82 declared the retrenchment as illegal and petitioner was directed to be reinstated in service with back wages. In compliance of the award passed by the Labour Court, the petitioner was granted regular appointment vide order dated 12.2.1986. It was further argued that when the petitioner was declared surplus and absorbed in another department i.e. Panchayati Raj Department, he had already completed the period of 9 years, therefore, his case for grant of selection scale as per relevant rules and instruction should have been considered by the Municipal Board. He should have been granted first selection scale. Learned counsel has referred to the last pay certificate issued by respondent- Board in which the petitioner was shown to be receiving the sum of Rs.4820/- as last pay with next increment due to him on 3 1.9.01. It is further argued that had the petitioner been granted the first selection scale, he would have received the higher scale of pay in the absorbing departmentbut due to inaction on the part of respondents, the petitioner has been deprived of the said benefits. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner was never appointed on regular basis. In fact, he was working on temporary basis and in support of his submission, he has referred to the contents of order dated 12.2.86 in which the respondents have stated that the petitioner was temporarily appointed on regular basis subject to the conditions as enumerated therein. It is further submitted that the petitioner was suspended on 19.1.1989 and he remained under suspension till 1991 as there were allegations of committing irregularities against him while serving the respondents and because of which he was subjected to certain disciplinary action. It was further argued that petitioner was again 4 suspended during the period from 27.8.94 to Nov.1995. It was contended that since the petitioner did not have any satisfactory service record, therefore, he is even otherwise, not entitled to any selection scale nor any other relief can be granted to him. 6. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, and perusal of the impugned order, it is revealed that by order dated 12.2.86, the petitioner was granted regular appointment subject to condition enumerated therein and along with the petitioner, one Bhudev Prasad was also appointed in the pay- scale of Rs.420-5-450-10-550-15-640-20-700 and in the order itself, words “Niyamit Niyukti” were used. The respondent-Municipal Board however have not at all considered the case of the petitioner for grant of selection scale even though before this appointment, the petitioner had completed 9 years in its service which is evident from the record that the petitioner was relieved from the service of the Board on 8.4.2000. Whether or not, the petitioner would have been granted selection scale on merits 5 because of adversities against him, could have been considered by the competent authority at the time of consideration of his case. His case however does not at all appear to have been considered by the Municipal Board. 7. In the result, the writ petition is allowed with the direction to the respondent-Municipal Board, Bhusawar to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of benefit of selection scale and if the petitioner is found suitable for such selection scale, grant him all consequential benefits with interest @9% and accordingly issue him the fresh last pay certificate which the petitioner would be at liberty to submit before the absorbing department with representation for consideration of his case and revision of his pay scale there. It is further made clear that the respondent-Board would be at liberty to consider the service record of the petitioner of the time during which the petitioner was in their service which may include any order of penalty. 8. Compliance of this order be made within 6 a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J. Srawat/- item no.s/12