2014 Supreme(Raj) 1384
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Amitava Roy, Vijay Bishnoi, JJ.
State of Rajasthan and another - Appellant
Versus
Bajrang Singh - Respondent
D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 463 of 2005, 541 of 2006 and 309 of 2007.
Decided On : 30-04-2014
For the Appellant:P.S. Bhati, AAG a/w, Sajjan Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Anil Bhandari and Rajeev Purohit, Advocates.
An amendment to service rules that affects the vested rights of employees cannot be applied retrospectively and violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
Headnote:
SERVICE LAW - RAJASTHAN AGRICULTURE SUBORDINATE SERVICE RULES, 1978 - RULE 5 - AMENDMENT - RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT - VESTED RIGHTS - SELECTION GRADE - ELIGIBILITY - QUALIFICATION - ARTICLE 14 AND 16 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.
Fact of the Case:
The private respondents were appointed as Fieldman, Garden Supervisor, Grape-pruner, Village Extension Worker, and Field Assistant in the Agriculture Department prior to 20.4.1977. In 1989, they were granted the benefit of selection grade in the next higher pay scale of Assistant Agriculture Officer. However, in 1991, the Rules of 1978 were amended to prescribe an educational qualification for promotion to the post of Assistant Agriculture Officer. The private respondents challenged the amendment, contending that it could not be applied retrospectively and could not affect their vested right to the selection grade.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that once the private respondents were granted the benefit of selection grade in 1989, taking into consideration their eligibility for promotion to the post of Assistant Agriculture Officer, the said benefit could not be withdrawn or taken away on the basis of an amendment made in 1991 in the respective rules. The court relied on the Supreme Court decision in T.R. Kapur and others v. State of Haryana & Ors., which held that any rule which affects the right of a person to be considered for promotion is a condition of service and that the benefits acquired under the existing rules cannot be taken away by an amendment with retrospective effect.
Issues: 1. Whether the amendment to the Rules of 1978 in 1991, which prescribed an educational qualification for promotion to the post of Assistant Agriculture Officer, could be applied retrospectively to the private respondents who were granted the benefit of selection grade in 1989? 2. Whether the amendment violated the private respondents' vested rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the amendment to the Rules of 1978 in 1991 could not be applied retrospectively to the private respondents because it affected their vested right to the selection grade, which was granted to them in 1989 based on their eligibility for promotion to the post of Assistant Agriculture Officer at that time. The court also held that the amendment violated the private respondents' rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, which guarantee equality before the law and prohibit discrimination.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeals filed by the State Government, upholding the orders of the single judge who had allowed the private respondents' writ petitions and quashed the amendment to the Rules of 1978.
JUDGMENT
1. - Since a common question is involved in all these appeals, the same are being decided by this common order.
2. The D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 463/2005 has been preferred against the order dated 24.5.2005 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1841/1999. The D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 541/2006 has been preferred against the order dated 2.6.2005 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 773/1999, whereby the above writ petition was allowed in terms of the order dated 24.5.2005 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1841/1999. The D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 309/2007 has been preferred against the order dated 3.8.2005 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1542/2001 whereby the above writ petition was disposed of in terms of the order dated 24.5.2005 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1841/1999.
3. The common facts, involved in all these appeals, are that all the private respondents were appointed as Fieldman, Garden Supervisor, Grape-pruner, Village Extension Worker and the Field Assistant in the Agriculture Department prior to 20.4.1977. At the time of appointment of the private respondents on the above mentioned posts, no educational qualification was prescribed as there were no service rules. The persons having qualification of matriculation or non-matriculation were given appointment at the District level by the competent authorities in the Agriculture Department. However, the above mentioned posts were re-designated as Agriculture Supervisors by the order dated 20.4.1977 bearing pay scale No. 7 ( Rs. 355-570). However, vide order dated 18.6.1980 issued by the competent authority, pay scale No. 7 was granted to the Agriculture Supervisors irrespective of their educational qualification.
4. The Rajasthan Agriculture Subordinate Service Rules, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1978) were promulgated vide notification dated 29.6.1978 and as per Rule 5 of the Rules of 1978, all the persons holding substantive posts specified in the schedule and all the persons regularly recruited in the service before the commencement of Rules of 1978, were made the members of service. In the Rules of 1978, the promotional post of the Agriculture Supervisor is Assistant Agriculture Officer. The post of Assistant Agriculture Officer was to be filled 50% by direct recruitment and 50% by promotion. For promotion to the post of Assistant Agriculture Officer, a person was required to have 10 years experience on the post of Agriculture Supervisor, however, no qualification was required for promotion.
5. It is not in dispute that the State Government issued an order dated.23.9.1989 by which selection grade for each eligible post was the scale for the next higher post in regular line except for the posts in subordinate services from which promotions are made directly to a post in State Service and isolated posts. Thereafter, the State Government fixed the selection grade pay scale of Agriculture Supervisors, including the respondents as per the order dated 23.9.1989.
6. However, after the grant of benefit of selection grade to the Agriculture Supervisor, the Rules of 1978 were amended and for the first time, the educational qualification for promotion to the post of Assistant Agriculture Officer was prescribed.
7. After the amendment in the Rules of 1978, vide notification dated 1.4.1999, the State Government in view of the limited opportunity of promotion and with a view to remove the problem of stagnation and to grant financial relief to its employees, issued a notification dated 25.1.1992 to provide selection grades on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service. Thereafter, the pay scales of employees of the State Government was revised through Rajasthan Civil Service (Revised Pay Scale) Rules, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1998). The Rules of 1998 came into force w.e.f. 1.9.1996, however, in the meantime, the Director, Agriculture Department, Rajasthan issued a circular dated 23.5.199
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
