IMPORTANT POINT
Similarly situated persons should be treated alike.

JUDGMENT

Chandramauli KR. Prasad, J. —

1. Petitioners, aggrieved by the orders dated 9th July, 2007 passed by the Rajasthan High Court in D.B.Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 623 of 2007 and D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.421 of 2007 affirming the order dated 18th September, 2006 passed by a learned Single Judge of that Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2331 of 2002, have preferred these petitions for grant of leave.

2. Leave granted.

3. These appeals arise in the following circumstances:

Naveen Kumar Saini and Shyam Lal, respondents herein along with other persons were appointed as Helpers in work- charge establishment on 28th November, 1979 at aconsolidated salary of Rs.150/- per month for a period of three months. However, the respondents were allowed to continue in service after the expiry of the aforesaid period of three months. Later on a limited competitive examination was held by the Rajasthan State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the “Board”) for appointment to the post of Junior Clerk, in which the respondents and other candidates participated and on merit altogether 81 persons including the respondents were appointed by Order dated 26th June, 1984 in the regular pay scale of the Junior Clerks. It is relevant here to state that the Board took a decision to consider regularisation of such work charge employees who had completed two years of service upto 31st March 1983 and for that purpose directed such employees to appear before the Selection Committee on 27th August, 1987. Respondents appeared before the Selection Committee, when they were informed that since they had already been appointed as Lower Division Clerks, there is no necessity to regularise them. Between the period from 17th September, 1987 to 13th October, 1987, altogether 27 persons, who joined as work charge employees like the respondents, became regular employees with effect from 1st April, 1982 and given regular pay scale of the post of Lower Division Clerk. Accordingly, respondents raised a grievance that they be given the pay scale of the post of Junior Clerk with effect from 1st December, 1979 and regular pay scale of the post of Clerk from 1st April, 1982 to 26th June, 1984. Respondents claimed the scale of pay of Junior Clerk from 1st December, 1979 on the plea that though they were engaged as helpers but they performed the work of Junior Clerk. The regular pay scale of post of Junior Clerk from 1st April, 1982 to 26th June, 1984 was sought on the ground that persons junior to them were given the said scale of pay with effect from 1st April, 1982. The aforesaid grievance of the respondents was considered by the Board but finding no merit in the same, it was rejected. Respondents then filed writ petitions before the Rajasthan High Court which by its order dated 25th April, 1997 passed in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3321 of 1991 and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3683 of 1991 declined to interfere on its finding that respondents had alternative efficacious remedy before the Industrial Tribunal.

4. Ultimately, the State Government by its letter dated 17th October, 1997 referred for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal as to whether the action of the appellants in not giving the respondents the scale of Junior Clerk with effect from Ist October, 1979 and for the period from Ist April, 1982 to 26th June, 1984, is valid and proper.

5. The Industrial Tribunal by its award dated 29th January, 2002 did not find any fault with the Board in not regularizing the services of the respondents on the post of Junior Clerk with effect from 1st December, 1979 but directed that respondents shall be entitled to the wages of the Junior Clerk from the said date. Relevant portion of the award of the Industrial Tribunal in respect of respondent Naveen Kumar Saini reads as follows:

“Hence, in the context of State (Appropriation of Appointments in Public Services and Staff Systematisation) Act 1999 not regularising Applicant Naveen Kumar Saini on the po