Back
2002 Supreme(Raj) 290
High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : K.S. Rathore
Nirmal Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4312 of 1991
Decided On : 02/15/2002
Satish Bijarniya, Advocate for N.K. Maloo, for the Appellant
S.N. Kumawat, for the Respondents
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for substantive appointment and the absence of provisions for relaxation as a government servant under the Rajasthan Educational Subordinate Service Rules 1971.
Headnote:
Age Relaxation - Government Employee - Rajasthan Educational Subordinate Service Rules 1971 - Rule 10(u), Rule 2(h), Rule 2(i) - The court discussed the provisions of Rule 10(u) for age relaxation, and the definitions of 'Service' and 'Substantive Appointment' under Rule 2(h) and Rule 2(i) respectively. The judgment highlighted the lack of provision for relaxation as a government servant in the Rules of 1971 and emphasized the requirement for substantive appointment to avail such relaxation.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged an order and an amendment in the Rajasthan Educational Subordinate Service Rule 1971 regarding age relaxation for government employees. The petitioner, a teacher, sought age relaxation for a senior teacher position based on her employment at a recognized school and a government-aided institution.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner did not meet the criteria for age relaxation as a government employee under the Service Rules 1971. The court dismissed the writ petition, emphasizing the lack of substantive appointment and the absence of provisions for relaxation as a government servant in the Rules.
Issues: The issues revolved around the petitioner's eligibility for age relaxation as a government employee under the Service Rules 1971 and the interpretation of the relevant provisions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the lack of substantive appointment and the absence of provisions for relaxation as a government servant in the Service Rules 1971.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed by the court with no order as to costs.
K.S. Rathore, J.-The petitioner by way of this writ petition challenged the order dated 7.5.1991 and the amendment in Rule 10 of the Rajasthan Educational Subordinate Service Rule 1971 (hereinafter to be referred as the Service Rules 1971).
2. Thepetitioner initially joined the Kala Mandir, Girls Middle School, Bharatpur on 7.1983 on the post of Teacher. At the relevant time the school was recognized and aided by the Government of Rajasthan. The petitioner’s appointment was also apprised by Senior Dy. Education Officer (Girls) Bharatpur vide his order dated 210.1983. The petitioner continued to work in the Kala Mandir, Bharatpur unto 112.1987. In response to the advertisement issued by the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, New Delhi for appointment on the post of Teacher Grade 111 petitioner also applied for Teacher Grade III (Hindi). The petitioner was selected through proper channel and since the line of the petitioner on the post of teacher remained with the Kala Mandir, Bharatpur and after selection on the post of Teacher Grade 111 petitioner was permitted to proceed on deputation by the management of Kala Mandir, Bharatpur with the approval of the Inspector of Girls Schools, Bharatpur and petitioner joined his service on 212.1987 at Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Patan, District Sikar on the post of Teacher Grade III (Hindi). Initially the period of deputation was fixed for 2 years and thereafter, period of deputation was extended by another year. The petitioner has been absorbed on the post of Teacher Grade HI (Hindi) under Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, District Sikar with the approval of Dy. Director, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti (Regional Office) Jaipur.
3. In the mean time the Rajasthan Public Service Commission issued an advertisement dated 28.1989 inviting the application for appointment on the post of Senior Teacher (Hindi). On 20.5.1990 a writtenlscreening test was held bythe RPSC and vide letter dated 212.1990 the petitioner asked to appear for interview on 19.1.199
1. At the time of interview the RPSC asked the petitioner to furnish the certificate for the proof of her work as permanent Rajasthan Government employee within the period of 15 days. Pursuant to that the petitioner submitted a certificate issued by the Kala Mandir, Bharatpur on 21.1991. By letter dated 8.3.1991 the petitioner was informed by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission that he has been selected for appointment on the post of Senior Teacher (Hindi) on provisional basis and her name find place at serial No. 44 in the select list. The petitioner was again asked to furnish the certificate having worked as a permanent Rajasthan State Government employee vide letter dated 20.3.199 1. The petitioner again submitted a certificate issued by the Kala Mandir, Bharatpur as earlier submitted at the time of provisional appointment on 21.199
1. After examining and scrutining the certificate/document submitted by the petitioner, the RPSC informed that since the petitioner failed to submit the requisite certificate to show that she is permanent employee of the Rajasthan Government and her candidature on account of being over-age is rejected and her case was not found fit for relaxation as is given in case of the Government employee. The petitioner submitted his
representation against the rejection on 7.1991; Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner is working in the Kala Mandir, Bharatpur which is duly recognised by the State Government and fully controlled and managed by the nominees of the State Government. It has also been submitted that the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti has also been constituted by the Ministry of Human Resource Development on the pattern of Kendriya Vidyalaya and also fully controlled and managed by the nominees of the Central Government and thus as agency of the Central Government. Therefore, the petitioner rightly claimed the benefit of age relaxation as a permanent employee of the State of Rajasthan in her applicat
