Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Indra Ram Acharya vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 22 March, 2022

Author:
Rekha Borana

Bench:
Rekha Borana

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3629/2018

Jai Prakash S/o Shri Hemraj Ji, R/o Acharyon-Ka-Baas, Barmer,
Rajasthan. Hall Class-Iv Servant At Govt. Secondary School,
Kurja, Barmer.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education Group-Ii, State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer Secondary, Barmer.
4. The District Education Officer Elementary, Barmer.
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 79/2018
Indra Ram Acharya S/o Shri Multan Mal Ji, R/o Acharyon-Ka-
Baas, Dhani Bazar, Hall Retd Class-Iv Servant From The Deptt.
Of Education, Barmer..
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education Group-Ii, State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer Secondary, Barmer.
4. The Director Pension, Directorate Of Pension And
Pensioners Welfare, Pension Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur-
302005.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 120/2018
Govind Singh S/o Shri Hanwant Singh, R/o Kanji Ki-Hodi, Magra
Bindasar, District- Barmer, Hall Retd. Class- Iv Servant From The
Department Of Education, Barmer.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education Group-Ii, State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer Secondary, Barmer.
4. The Director Pension, Directorate Of Pension And
Pensioner Welfare, Pension Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur-
302005.
----Respondents

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)
(2 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 584/2018
Sukhdev Bhargava S/o Shri Deepchand Bhargava, R/o Behind
Shani Mandir, Hameerpura, Barmer, Rajasthan. Hall Retd. Class-
Iv Servant From The Deptt. Of Education, Barmer
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education Group-II, State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer, Secondary Barmer.
4. The Director Pension, Directorate Of Pension And
Pensioners Welfare, Pension Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur-
302005.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 715/2018
Shankar Singh S/o Shri Man Singh, R/o Village And Post-
Langera, District- Barmer, Rajasthan. Hall Retd Class-Iv Servant
From The Deptt. Of Education, Barmer..
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education Group-Ii, State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer Secondary, Barmer.
4. The Director Pension, Directorate Of Pension And
Pensioners Welfare, Pension Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur-
302005.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 774/2018
Magha Ram S/o Shri Taja Ram Ji, R/o Vill. And Post-
Dhorimanna, District- Barmer. Rajasthan. Hall Retd. Class-IV
Servant From The Deptt. Of Education, Barmer..
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education Group-II, State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer Secondary, Barmer.
4. The Director Pension, Directorate Of Pension And
Pensioners Welfare, Pension Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur-
302005.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3606/2018
Jaisa Ram S/o Shri Amra Ram Ji, R/o Village And Post- Kawas,
District- Barmer, Rajasthan. Hall Class-IV Servant At Department

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)
(3 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

Of Secondary Education, Barmer.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education Group-II, State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer Secondary, Barmer.
4. The District Education Officer Elementary, Barmer.
----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3630/2018
Poonam Singh S/o Shri Bhim Singh Ji, R/o Gandhi Nagar, Ward
No. 18, Barmer, Rajasthan. Hall Class-IV Servant At Govt.
Secondary School, Station Road, Barmer.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education Group-II, State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer Secondary, Barmer.
4. The District Education Officer Elementary, Barmer.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3631/2018
Shivji Ram S/o Shri Padma Ram Ji, R/o Village And Post- Duda,
Via Kawas, District- Barmer, Rajasthan. Hall Class-Iv Servant In
The Department Of Elementary, Barmer.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education Group-Ii, State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer Secondary, Barmer.
4. The District Education Officer Elementary, Barmer.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3768/2018
Tej Singh S/o Shri Sardar Singh Ji, R/o Village And Post-Kawas,
District- Barmer, Rajasthan. Hall Retd. Class- Iv Servant At
Department Of Secondary Education, Barmer.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education Group-Ii, State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)
(4 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer Secondary, Barmer.
4. The District Education Officer Elementary, Barmer.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4781/2018
Mangla Ram S/o Shri Anada Ram, R/o Village And Post- Mangata
Via Dhorimanna, District- Barmer, Rajasthan. Hall Office
Assistant In The Department Of Secondary Education, Barmer,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education Group-Ii, State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer Secondary, Barmer.
4. The District Education Officer Elementary, Barmer.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5108/2018
Mangi Lal S/o Shri Tikma Ram Ji, R/o Village And Post - Gagariya
Station, Tehsil- Ramsar, District Barmer, Rajasthan. Hall Clerk
Grade-I In The Department Of Secondary Education, Barmer,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education Group-Ii, State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer Secondary, Barmer.
4. The District Education Officer Elementary, Barmer.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5411/2018
Surta Ram S/o Shri Dalla Ram, R/o Village And Post- Mangata
Via Dhorimanna, District- Barmer, Rajasthan. Hall Teacher
Grade- Iii In The Department Of Elementary Education, Barmer,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education Group-Ii, State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer Secondary, Barmer.
4. The District Education Officer Elementary, Barmer.
----Respondents

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)
(5 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6253/2018
Dama Ram S/o Shri Prahlad Ram Ji, Caste-Prajapat, R/o Govt.
Upper Primary School, Baldevnagar, Barmer. Hall Class-Iv At
D.i.e.t. Barmer In Dept. Of Education Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education Group-Ii, State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer Secondary, Barmer.
4. The District Education Officer Elementary, Barmer.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6309/2018
Umeda Ram S/o Shri Kishna Ram Ji, Caste- Prajapat, R/o Vilalge
And Post- Adarsh Duda, Hadman Nagar, District- Barmer,
Rajasthan, Hall Class-Iv At Department Of Education, Barmer
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education Group-Ii, State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer Secondary, Barmer.
4. The District Education Officer Elementary, Barmer.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6316/2018
Ghamanda Ram S/o Shri Prabhu Ram Ji, Caste- Jat, R/o In Front
Of Shastri Nagar Police Station, Barmer, Rajasthan. Hall Class-Iv
At Department Of Education, Barmer.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education Group-Ii, State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer Secondary, Barmer.
4. The District Education Officer Elementary, Barmer.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9064/2018
Noratan Ram S/o Shri Kishan Lal, Aged About 61 Years, Opp
Shiv Mandir, Acharyaon Ka Baas, Dhani Bazar, Barmer,
Rajasthan. ( Hall Retd. Udc Deptt., Of Secondary Education,
Barmer).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)
(6 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

Of Education (Group-Ii), State Secretariat Govt. Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer (Secondary), Barmer.
4. The District Education Officer (Elementary), Barmer.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9066/2018
Madanraj Acharya S/o Punjraj Ji, Aged About 63 Years, Acharyon
Ka Baas, Dhani Bazar, Barmer. Hall Retd. Class Iv Servant From
The Department Of Education, Barmer
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Education (Group Ii) State Secretariat Fovt. Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director., Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan
3. The District Education Officer (Secondary), Barmer.
4. The Director (Pension), Directorate Of Pension And
Pensioners Welfare Pension Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1770/2019
Moola Ram S/o Shri Gumana Ram Ji, Aged About 52 Years,
Presently Working As U.d.c. At Govt. Senior Secondary School,
Kanod, District- Barmer, Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education (Group-Ii), State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer (Secondary), Barmer.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1876/2019
Ladhu Ram S/o Shri Ghamanda Ram, Aged About 55 Years, Vill.
And Post- Chotu, Tehsil- Gudamalani, District- Barmer,
Rajasthan. (Hall Class-Iv Servant, Presently At Govt. Senior
Secondary School, Mokhawa, Distt. Barmer).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Education (Group-Ii), State Secretariat Govt. Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer (Secondary ), Barmer.
----Respondents

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)
(7 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1906/2019
Rameshwar Lal S/o Shri Kheta Ram Gaur, Aged About 53 Years,
Village And Post- Batadu Via Kawas, District- Barmer, Rajasthan.
(Hall U.d.c. At Govt. Senior Secondary School, Hudon-Ki-Dhani,
Bayatu, District- Barmer, Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education (Group-Ii), State Secretariat,
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer (Secondary), Barmer.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1908/2019
Hanumana Ram S/o Shri Lala Ram Gaur, Aged About 59 Years,
Caste Branmin, R/o Village Batadu, Via Kawas, District Barmer,
Rajasthan (Hall Class-Iv Servant At Govt. Senior Secondary
School, Batadu Via - Kawas, District Barmer, Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education (Group-Ii), State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer (Secondary), Barmer.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1909/2019
Thakara Ram S/o Shri Mota Ram, Aged About 55 Years, Caste-
Jat, R/o Village- Bothiya Jagir, Post- Kaputadi, District- Barmer,
Rajasthan. (Hall Senior Assistant (U.d.c.) At Govt. Senior
Secondary School, Bhadkha, District- Barmer, Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education (Group-Ii), State Secretariat
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer (Secondary), Barmer.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1984/2019
Sona Ram S/o Shri Bhagwana Ram, Aged About 54 Years, R/o
Vill. And Post- Ranasar- Khurd, Tehsil- Gudamalani, District-
Barmer, Rajasthan. (Hall- Class-Iv Servant, Presently At Govt.
Senior Secondary School, Ranasar- Khurd, Barmer).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Education (Group-Ii), State Secretariat Govt. Of

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)
(8 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer (Secondary), Barmer.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4676/2019
Mangi Lal S/o Shri Veeram Ji, Aged About 55 Years, Caste-
Meghwal, R/o Village And Post- Majal, Tehsil- Gudamalani,
District- Barmer, Rajasthan. (Hall Class Iv Servant, Presently At
Govt. Senior Secondary School, Majal, District- Barmer,
Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Education (Group-Ii), State Secretariat Govt. Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer (Secondary), Barmer.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12760/2019
Bhoora Ram S/o Shri Deraj Ram Ji, Aged About 55 Years, R/o
Village Jalipa Agora, Tehsil District Barmer, Rajasthan (Hall Class
Iv Servant At Govt. Senior Secondary School, Bola, Barmer).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Education (Group-Ii), State Secretariat, Govt. Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Director Of Secondary Education, Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer (Secondary), Barmer.
4. The District Education Officer (Elementary), Barmer.
----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.P. Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hemant Choudhary
Mr. Ravi Panwar

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order
22/03/2022

All these writ petitions having been filed by similarly situated

people and involving identical questions of law are being heard

and decided together.

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)

(9 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

For the sake of convenience, facts of S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No. 3629/2018;
Jai Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
are

taken as a lead case.

Brief details of the essential dates qua all the petitioners is

reproduced hereunder:

Sr. Writ No. Date of Date of Date of Petition filed
No. Joining Regularization Retirement on
of service

1. CWP 3629/18 09.07.1986 22.08.1994 31.07.2027 12.03.2018
Jai Prakash In service

2. CWP 79/2018 15.09.1981 21.10.1991 31.07.2014 21.12.2017
Indra Ram Acharya Retired

3. CWP 120/2018 15.09.1981 21.10.1991 31.03.2019 02.01.2018
Govind Singh Retired

4. CWP 584/2018 02.02.1982 21.10.1991 31.10.2015 10.01.2018
Sukhdev Bhargav Retired

5. CWP 715/2018 04.07.1986 21.10.1991 28.02.2017 03.01.2018
Shankar Singh Retired

6. CWP 774/2018 02.02.1982 21.10.1991 31.07.2010 18.12.2017
Magharam Retired

7. CWP 3606/18 24.05.1985 28.08.1992 31.07.2023 12.03.2018
Jaisa Ram In service

8. CWP 3630/18 06.03.1980 21.10.1991 30.06.2020 12.03.2018
Poonam Singh Retired

9. CWP 3631/18 14.04.1980 21.10.1991 31.07.2021 12.03.2018
Shivijiram Retired

10. CWP 3768/18 01.07.1986 21.10.1991 31.01.2018 12.03.2018
Tej Singh Retired

11. CWP 4781/18 15.09.1981 21.10.1991 30.06.2023 17.03.2018
Mangla Ram In service

12. CWP 5108/18 02.02.1982 31.10.1991 31.08.2023 17.03.2018
Mangilal-I In service

13. CWP 5411/18 15.09.1991 21.10.1991 30.04.2019 30.03.2018
Surtaram Retired

14. CWP 6253/18 24.05.1985 15.12.1993 31.12.2027 24.04.2018
Damaram In service

15. CWP 6309/18 24.05.1985 15.05.1993 31.10.2014 26.04.2018
Umedaram Retired

16. CWP 6316/18 07.07.1986 13.08.1994 31.08.2023 26.04.2018
Ghamandaram In service

17. CWP 9064/18 04.02.1982 31.10.1991 31.12.2017 29.06.2018
Noratan Ram Retired

18. CWP 9066/18 15.09.1981 31.10.1991 30.06.2015 29.06.2018
Madanraj Acharya Retired

19. CWP 1770/19 04.09.1986 10.08.1994 28.02.2026 07.01.2019
Moola Ram In service

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)

(10 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

20. CWP 1876/19 01.07.1985 21.05.1993 31.12.2024 11.01.2019
Ladhu Ram In service

21. CWP 1906/19 01.07.1985 25.05.1993 31.08.2026 07.01.2019
Rameshwarlal In service

22. CWP 1908/19 01.07.1985 25.10.1991 30.09.2019 07.01.2019
Hanumana Ram Retired

23. CWP 1909/19 05.07.1985 22.12.1993 30.11.2023 07.01.2019
Thakraram In service

24. CWP 1984/19 17.09.1986 15.08.1994 30.06.2024 15.01.2019
Sona Ram In service

25. CWP 4676/19 01.07.1985 09.09.1992 30.09.2023 14.03.2019
Mangilal-II In service

26. CWP 12760/19 11.10.1985 10.12.1993 30.06.2020 19.08.2019
Bhoora Ram Retired

The case of the petitioners is that they were appointed with

the Department as Class-IV employee through a regular selection

process on daily wage basis. Later on, a decision was taken by

the Government to regularize the services of such daily wager

Class-IV servants. In that regard order dated 30.09.1985 was

passed wherein criteria for regularization of services was fixed. In

pursuance to the said order and in pursuance to certain orders

passed by the High Court in certain writ petitions filed by the

employees the services of the Class-IV employees were

regularized by the Department. In the present matters, the said

date of regularization qua all the petitioners fall somewhere

between the year 1991-1994. 14 out of the present petitioners

have since retired and 12 are still in service.

The case of the petitioners in the present petitions is that

their services have not been regularized w.e.f the date of initial

appointment which ought to have been done as the petitioners are

the persons similarly situated to one Meera Devi to whom the said

benefits had been granted. It has been submitted that Meera Devi

was an employee who was appointed on the same date on which

one of the petitioners, namely, Jai Prakash was appointed and was

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)

(11 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

also regularized on the same date i.e. 22.08.1994 on which Jai

Prakash was regularized. Meera Devi raised a dispute before the

Labour Court with a prayer for regularization of her service from

the date of her initial appointment. The claim of Meera Devi was

allowed by the Labour court and the writ petition preferred against

the same being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4320/2012 was also

dismissed. It has been submitted that in pursuance to the orders

passed by this Court, the services of Meera Devi have been

regularized from the date of her initial appointment and therefore,

the petitioners being similarly situated persons have a right to

claim parity and should be granted the same benefits as granted

to Meera Devi. Alternatively, it has been submitted that initial

date of appointment should be considered at least for the

purposes of calculation of gratuity and pension benefits as the

qualifying service as defined under Rule 12 of the Rajasthan Civil

Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (for short hereinafter referred to

as, 'the Rules of 1996') and
Section 2
of the Payment of Gratuity

Act, 1972 (for short hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act of 1972')

has been completed by the petitioners.

Counsel for the petitioners submitted that as the order

passed in Meera Devi's case has become final for all purposes and

has been implemented and executed by the Department, the

same is definitely applicable to the present petitioners too and

they also deserve to be granted the same benefits. It has further

been submitted that although the present petitioners have raised

their claims belatedly, but the said delay cannot come in the way

of granting relief to the petitioners as it has been held in the

catena of judgments that if a relief has been granted to a similarly

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)

(12 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

situated person, the same cannot be denied to the other

incumbents on the ground of delay.

So far as the issue whether the petitioners have completed

the qualifying service for the purpose of calculation of pension and

gratuity is concerned, the counsel has relied upon the judgment

passed in the case of
Netram Sahu vs. State of Chhattisgarh

(2018 AIR SC 1545) decided on 23.03.2018.

Counsel for the petitioners also relied upon the following

judgments:

1.
State of Haryana vs. Mohinder Singh
; (2017) 4 SCC 587

2.
Maharaj Krishan Bhatt and Anr. vs. State of Jammu and
Kashmir and Ors.
; (2008) 9 SCC 24

3.
Sheo Narain Nagar vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
; (2018) AIR
(SC) 233

4. Neelima Srivastava vs. State of Uttar Pradesh; AIR 2021 SC
5.
Meera Devi vs. State of Raj.
; S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.5288/2014 decided on 26.08.2015

6.
Salim Khan vs. State of Raj.
; S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.14362/2016 decided on 16.01.2018

7.
Govind Dan Charan vs. State
; D.B. Special Appeal Writ
No.1068/2014 decided on 17.12.2015

8. Jai Narain Vyas Uni. vs. Mukesh; D.B. Special Appeal Writ
No.347/2019 decided on 13.08.2021

9.
Prakash Chandra vs. State
; S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.116/2017 decided on 03.01.2018

10.
Shree Gopal Gaur vs. State
; S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.11839/2016 decided on 13.04.2018

11.
Keshrimal Soni vs. State of Raj.
; S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.4743/2004 decided on 22.08.2012

Per contra, counsel for the respondents submitted that the

present petitions deserve to be dismissed only on the ground of

delay. It has been submitted by the respondents that the services

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)

(13 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

of the petitioners were regularized somewhere between the year

1991-1994 to which the petitioners never raised any objection and

many of them have even retired. The fact itself is sufficient to

prove that the petitioners were never aggrieved of the date of

regularization and therefore, they cannot be permitted to

challenge the same after a period of more than 25 years. Counsel

further submitted that it is true that Meera Devi was granted the

said relief but it was in pursuance to the directions issued by this

Court. Meera Devi had raised her grievance soon after the

regularization of her services and therefore the petitioners who

had never challenged their orders of regularization at the relevant

point of time cannot challenge the same now. So far as the

calculation of the pension and gratuity benefits from the date of

initial appointment is concerned counsel for the respondents has

submitted that the same also being the consequential relief cannot

be granted.

Counsel for the respondents relied upon the following

judgments:

1.
New Delhi Municipal Council vs. Pan Singh and Ors.
; (2007)
9 SCC 278

2.
Union of India and Ors. vs. M.K. Sarkar
; (2010) 2 SCC 59

3.
Santosh Kumar and Ors. vs. G.R. Chawla and Ors.
; (2003)
10 SCC 513

4.
State of Rajasthan and Anr. vs. Surendra Mohnot and Ors.
;
(2014) 14 SCC 77

5.
State of Rajasthan and Ors. vs. Jagdish Narain Chaturvedi
;
(2009) 12 SCC 49

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)

(14 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

Heard the parties and perused the material available on

record.

A bare perusal of the grounds raised in the petitions makes it

clear that the present petitions have been filed by the petitioners

on the sole ground that as Meera Devi, similarly situated person,

has been granted regularization w.e.f the date of her initial

appointment the same may be granted to them also. It is clear on

record that services of the petitioners were regularized way back

between years 1991-94, and no such grievance was ever raised by

the petitioners even till the date of their retirement (in case where

the petitioner had retired). Only when orders for pension in the

case of Meera Devi, calculating the same on the basis of initial

date of appointment were issued, the present petitioners too

decided to raise their claim for first time in the year 2017 vide a

notice which was served on the respondent-authorities.

In the case of
New Delhi Municipal Council Vs. Pan

Singh & Ors.
; (2007) 9 Supreme Court Cases 278, the

Hon'ble Apex Court has held that a person, who did not choose to

challenge a specific order at the relevant point of time and

challenged the same only after the relief was granted to a similarly

situated employee, cannot be granted the same benefit. The

Hon'ble Apex Court held as under:

"16. There is another aspect of the matter which
cannot be lost sight of. Respondents herein filed a
Writ Petition after 17 years. They did not agitate
their grievances for a long time. They, as noticed
herein, did not claim parity with the 17 workmen
at the earliest possible opportunity. They did not
implead themselves as parties even in the
reference made by the State before the Industrial
Tribunal. It is not their case that after 1982, those
employees who were employed or who were
recruited after the cut-off date have been granted
the said scale of pay. After such a long time,
therefore, the Writ Petitions could not have been

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter.
Please refer the same for further orders)

(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)

(15 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

entertained even if they are similarly situated. It
is trite that the discretionary jurisdiction may not
be exercised in favour of those who approach the
Court after a long time. Delay and laches are
relevant factors for exercise of equitable
jurisdiction. See
Govt. of W.B. v. Tarun K. Roy
And Others
[(
2004) 1 SCC 347], Chairman, U.P.
Jal Nigam & Anr. v. Jaswant Singh And Anr.
[2006
(12) SCALE 347] and Karnataka Power Corpn. Ltd.

through its Chairman & Managing Director and
Another v. K. Thangappan and Another [(2006) 4
SCC 322]."

So far as the claim of the petitioners for regularization of

their services w.e.f the date of initial appointment is concerned,

this Court is not inclined to interfere with the same because of a

gross delay of 25 years being caused in raising the said claim.

So far as the other judgments cited by the counsel for the

petitioners in support of the submissions regarding the

regularization of the petitioners are concerned, there is no dispute

pertaining to the ratio as laid down in the said judgments. But as

this Court is not inclined to interfere in the present matters qua

the relief of regularization on the ground of gross delay, the said

judgments are not required to be dealt with in the present matter.

So far as the case of petitioners who have since retired and

pray for calculation of the pensionary and gratuity benefits from

the date of initial appointment are concerned, the ground raised

by the counsel for the petitioners is found to be tenable. Rule 12

of the Rules of 1996 defines qualifying services as under:

"12. Commencement of qualifying service

(a) Except for compensation gratuity, a
Government servant's service does not qualify till
he has completed eighteen years of age.

(b) Subject to the provisions of these rules, the
qualifying service of a Government servant shall
commence from the date he takes over charge of
the post to which he is first appointed, either
substantively or in an officiating or temporary
capacity."

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)

(16 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

Section 2(c)
of the Act of 1972 defines 'continuous service'

as under:

"2(c) "continuous service" means continuous
service as defined in
section 2A
;"

Section 2A(1)
of the Act of 1972 reads as under:

"2A. Continuous service.--For the purposes of this
Act--

(1) an employee shall be said to be in continuous
service for a period if he has, for that period, been
in uninterrupted service, including service which
may be interrupted on account of sickness,
accident, leave, absence from duty without leave
(not being absence in respect of which an order
treating the absence as break in service has been
passed in accordance with the standing orders,
rules or regulations governing the employees of
the establishment), lay-off, strike or a lock-out or
cessation of work not due to any fault of the
employee, whether such uninterrupted or
interrupted service was rendered before or after
the commencement of this Act;"

In view of the above provisions, it is clear that the remaining

14 petitioners who have since retired, having completed their

qualifying services, were entitled for calculation of pensionary and

gratuity benefits w.e.f. the date of initial appointment.

In the case of
Shree Gopal Gaur Vs. State of Rajasthan

& Ors.
; S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11839/2016, while relying

upon the judgment passed in
Keshrimal Soni Vs. State & Ors.
;

S.B.C.W.P. No.4743/2004, the Coordinate Bench of this Court

held as under:

"I have considered the submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties and have perused the
material available on record. Provisions of Rule 12(b) of
the Rules of 1996 read as under:-

"Rule 12. Commencement of qualifying service

(a) Except for compensation gratuity, a Government
servant's service does not qualify till he has completed
eighteen years of age.

(b) Subject to the provisions of these Rules, the
qualifying service of a Government servant shall

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)

(17 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

commence from the date he takes over charge of the post
to which he is first appointed, either substantively or in an
officiating or temporary capacity."

A bare perusal of Clause (b) of Rule 12 indicates
that qualifying service of a Government servant shall
commence from the date he takes charge on the post,
for which, he is first appointed, either substantively or in
an officiating or temporary capacity.

The term temporary post has been defined in Rule
7(35) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 ('Rules of
1951'), which reads as under:-"

"Temporary post - means a post carrying a definite
rate of pay sanctioned for a limited time."

The order of appointment of the petitioner dated
09.05.1985 reads as under:-

^^dk;kZy; vkns"k

fu;kstu dk;kZy; ds lwph esa ls fuEufyf[kr vk'kkfFkZ;ksa dh
izfrfnu vf/kdre 234@& izfrekg dk;Zxzg.k djus dh
frfFk ls muds uke ds lEeq[k vafdr fo|ky; esa fu;qDr
fd;k tkrk gS ;s fu;qfDr;k iw.kZr;k vLFkk;h gSA fcuk
uksfVl budh lsok;s lekIr dh tk ldrh gSA nSfud HkRrs
ij dh xbZ lsok;s fu;fer jkT; deZpkjh in izkIr djus
dk v/kkj ugha ekuk tk;sxkA bUgsa inLFkkiu LFkku ij
fnukad 16-5-85 rd dk;Zxzg.k djuk gksxkA vU;Fkk fu;qfDr
vkns'k Lor gh fujLr le>s tk;sxsA laLFkk iz/kku buds
dk;Z ,oa O;ogkj ls lacaf/kr fVIi.kh izfr ekg dh mifLFkfr
ds lkFk lacaf/kr vf/kdkjh dks izsf"kr djsaxsA**

A perusal of the terms above would clearly indicate
that the petitioner was granted appointment on
temporary post and once the appointment has been
made on temporary post, in terms of Rule 12(b) of the
Rules of 1996, the petitioner is entitled to get the said
period counted towards his qualifying service."

In view of the ratio as
laid down in
the case of
Keshrimal

Soni and Shree Gopal Gaur
(supra), and the observations made

herein above, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioners who

have retired are entitled for calculation of their pension and

gratuity benefits from the date of initial appointment in service.

In view of the same, so far as the following 14 petitioners

who have since retired, their writ petitions are partly allowed. The

respondents are directed to take into consideration the initial date

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)

(18 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

of appointment of the 14 retired petitioners for the purpose of

calculating their qualifying service and grant them consequential

benefits qua pension and gratuity in accordance with law:

1. Civil Writ Petition No.79/2018;
Indra Ram Acharya Vs. State & Ors
.

2. Civil Writ Petition No.120/2018;
Govind Singh Vs. State & Ors
.

3. Civil Writ Petition No.584/2018 Sukhdev Bhargav Vs. State & Ors.

4.
Civil Writ Petition No.715/2018 Shankar Singh Vs. State & Ors
.

5.
Civil Writ Petition No.774/2018 Magharam Vs. State & Ors
.

6.
Civil Writ Petition No.3630/2018 Poonam Singh Vs. State & Ors
.

7. Civil Writ Petition No.3631/2018 Shivijiram Vs. State & Ors.

8.
Civil Writ Petition No.3768/2018 Tej Singh Vs. State & Ors
.

9.
Civil Writ Petition No.5411/2018 Surtaram Vs. State & Ors
.

10.
Civil Writ Petition No.6309/2018 Umedaram Vs. State & Ors
.

11. Civil Writ Petition No.9064/2018 Noratan Ram Vs. State & Ors.

12. Civil Writ Petition No.9066/2018 Madanraj Acharya Vs. State & Ors.

13. Civil Writ Petition No.1908/2019 Hanumana Ram Vs. State & Ors.

14. Civil Writ Petition No.12760/2019 Bhoora Ram Vs. State & Ors.

Needful be done by the respondent-authorities within a

period of three months of receipt of copy of this order.

So far as the following 12 petitioners who are already in

service are concerned, their writ petitions are dismissed:

1.
Civil Writ Petition No.3629/2018 Jai Prakash Vs. State & Ors
.

2. Civil Writ Petition No.3606/2018 Jaisa Ram Vs. State & Ors.

3. Civil Writ Petition No.4781/2018 Mangla Ram Vs. State & Ors.

4.
Civil Writ Petition No.5108/2018 Mangilal-I Vs. State & Ors
.

5.
Civil Writ Petition No.6253/2018 Damaram Vs. State & Ors
.

6. Civil Writ Petition No.6316/2018 Ghamandaram Vs.State & Ors.

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)

(19 of 19) [CW-3629/2018]

7. Civil Writ Petition No.1770/2019 Moola Ram Vs. State & Ors.

8. Civil Writ Petition No.1876/2019 Ladhu Ram Vs. State & Ors.

9.
Civil Writ Petition No.1906/2019 Rameshwarlal Vs. State & Ors
.

10.
Civil Writ Petition No.1909/2019 Thakraram Vs. State & Ors
.

11.
Civil Writ Petition No.1984/2019 Sona Ram Vs. State & Ors
.

12.
Civil Writ Petition No.4676/2019 Mangilal-II Vs. State & Ors
.

All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly.

(REKHA BORANA),J
97-122/T.Singh, Abhishek S./-

(D.B. SAW/680/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(Downloaded on 26/12/2022 at 12:24:53 AM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)