Judgment

A.S. ANAND, J.

(1) DELAY condoned.

(2) SPECIAL leave granted.

(3) THE State of Rajasthan has filed this batch of special leave petitions from various orders of the High court of Rajasthan in the writpetitions filed by the respondents seeking identical relief. The High court directed the petitioners to fix the respondents in Grade I male nurses-cum-compounders with effect from the date they acquired the requisite qualification and further directed the petitioners to give all consequential benefits to the respondents within the specified time. Directions were also issued to the petitioners, vide an order dated 15/12/1988 (subject-matter of Special Leave Petition Nos. 9164-69 of 1990) to consider the case of all other Grade I male nurses-cum-compounders who have acquired the requisite qualification and to give them benefit of Grade I with effect from the date they acquired the said qualifications irrespective of the fact whether they had filed writ petitions or not. As would be seen from the judgment of the Division bench, dated 15/12/1988, the court noticed the relief claimed by the writpetitioners to be appointed as male nurses, Grade I from the date they acquired qualification of general nursing i.e. PNRC/BPNA/RNRC, as the writ-petitioners were already matriculates, the court observed thus :

"... There is also no dispute between the parties that a lot of litigation had taken place in the matter of grant of Grade I to the male nurse/compounder. In all the cases, the respondents were directed to fix the male nurse/compounder on the post of male nurse, Gr. I from the date they acquired qualification,

(4) THE court then went on to observe :

"FROM the enumeration of the facts stated above, there is no dispute between the parties on the following facts :

1. That the petitioners in all the writ petitions are matriculate and they have acquired technical qualification from Bombay Pradesh Nursing Association or its equivalent Nursing Course from Punjab Nursing Registration council or other equivalent courses.

2. The respondents have also not disputed that litigation took place between the male nurse, Grade I and the respondents, in which the High court as well as the Services Appellate tribunal, directed the respondents to fix the male nurse/compounders in Gr. I from the date they acquired the above two qualifications."

(5) THE court then went on to opine :

"... It is an admitted position and cannot be disputed by the respondents that in view of the various judgments referred to above S/Shri Gajraj Mehta, Kishan Singh Bhati, Jugal Kishore Joshi, Bhanwar Lal Bhati, Lalu Ram, Purshottam Bhatt, Mangi Lal, Dayal Singh, Daulal, Hari Narain, U.R. Choudhar Bherudas, Ramesh Chandra, Bhanwar Lal Verma, Kanhaiya Das, Bheru Lal, Janardhan Rai, Abbas Ali, Bhagwan Puri, Chandra Sen, Banshi Lal, Heera Lal, Kailash Nath Chauhan, Shyam Lal and Ganpat Lal were given the benefit of Gr. I either from the date of their initial appointment, or from the date of passing of the General Nursing Course from PNRC/RNRC; but the same has been denied to the male nurses, Gr. I who did not approach either to this court or to the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate tribunal. This clearly proves that the respondents believe in litigation rather than giving relief to its employees who have a valid right supported and well settled by the authoritative judicial pronouncement made by this court or by the competent tribunal. Once the right of male nurse, Gr. I stood settled by judicial pronouncement, then the other similarly situate male nurses, Gr. I are entitled to be fixed in Gr. I with effect from the date they acquired the requisite qualification and the State cannot be allowed to (sic) persons who have gone to the court and it will deny the same relief to those who did not believe in litigation and have not gone to the court of law for vindicating their rights. Male nurses, Gr. I who have gone t