2013 Supreme(Raj) 1808
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Amitava Roy, P.K.Lohra, JJ.
Suresh Kumar and others - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 10493 of 2011.
Decided On : 17-09-2013
For the Petitioners:M.S. Singhvi, Sr. Advocate, with Manoj Bhandari and Hemant Dutt, Advocates.
For the Respondent:G.R. Punia, Sr. Advocate, assisted by R.S. Choudhary, Advocate.
The appointment of a Stamp Reporter to the post of Court Master is not a promotion under the relevant Service Rules, and the petitioners are entitled to the selection grade in the pay scale of Rs. 6,500-10,500 as stipulated by the notification dated 25.1.1992/17.2.1998 on completion of 27 years of service.
Headnote:
SERVICE - SELECTION GRADE - COURT MASTERS - PROMOTION - INTERPRETATION OF RULES - NOTIFICATIONS - GRANT OF THIRD SELECTION GRADE - ENTITLEMENT - CONDITIONS - PAY SCALE - LEGAL PRINCIPLES.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners, working as Court Masters in Jodhpur High Court, sought judicial intervention for grant of third selection grade on completion of 27 years of service with consequential benefits. They challenged the circular dated 17.2.1998, insofar as it concerned Court Masters, and sought a declaration that persons working as Court Masters are entitled to third selection grade equivalent to the pay scale of Assistant Registrar or, alternatively, a declaration that the third selection grade cannot be less than Rs. 8000-13500.
Finding of the Court:
1. The appointment of a Stamp Reporter to the post of Court Master is not a promotion under the relevant Service Rules. 2. Petitioners are entitled to the selection grade in the pay scale of Rs. 6,500-10,500 as stipulated by the notification dated 25.1.1992/17.2.1998 on completion of 27 years of service. 3. The actual relief of third selection grade would stand limited up to 2.3.2009, the date of conferment of gazetted status to the post of Court Master. 4. The challenge to paragraphs 2(iii), 4(iii) & 5 of the circular dated 17.2.1998 is negated.
Issues: 1. Whether the appointment of a Stamp Reporter to the post of Court Master is a promotion under the relevant Service Rules? 2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to the third selection grade equivalent to the pay scale of Assistant Registrar or, alternatively, a declaration that the third selection grade cannot be less than Rs. 8000-13500? 3. Whether the circular dated 17.2.1998, insofar as it concerns Court Masters, is illegal, arbitrary, and unreasonable?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court interpreted the relevant Service Rules and the notifications dated 25.1.1992 and 17.2.1998 to determine the entitlement of Court Masters to the third selection grade. 2. The Court held that the appointment of a Stamp Reporter to the post of Court Master is not a promotion under the relevant Service Rules. 3. The Court further held that the petitioners are entitled to the selection grade in the pay scale of Rs. 6,500-10,500 as stipulated by the notification dated 25.1.1992/17.2.1998 on completion of 27 years of service. 4. The Court also held that the actual relief of third selection grade would stand limited up to 2.3.2009, the date of conferment of gazetted status to the post of Court Master. 5. The Court negated the challenge to paragraphs 2(iii), 4(iii) & 5 of the circular dated 17.2.1998.
Final Decision: Petition partly allowed.
JUDGMENT
1. - Petitioners, who are presently working as Court Masters with this court at its principal seat at Jodhpur, seeks judicial intervention for grant of third selection grade on completion of 27 years of service with consequential benefits including interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the accrued arrears. In addition, annulment of Clause(iii) of para 2, Clause (iii) of para 4 and para 5 of the Circular dated 17.2.1998, so far as it concerns the Court Masters, has been prayed-for. A declaration that persons working on the post of Court Masters are entitled to third selection grade, equivalent to the pay scale of the post of Assistant Registrar; alternatively, a declaration that the third selection grade cannot be less than 8000-13500, has been sought for as well.
2. We have heard Mr.M.S.Singhvi, Sr.Advocate, with Mr.Manoj Bhandari & Mr.Hemant Dutt, appearing for the petitioners and Mr.G.R.Punia, Sr.Advocate, assisted by Mr.R.S.Choudhary, for the respondents.
3. The pleaded facts outline the rival orientations. While contending that they, in the instant proceedings, project a common grievance based on identical grounds, the petitioners have averred that the service conditions of the staff of this Court, were hitherto governed by the Rajasthan High Court (Conditions of Service of Staff) Rules, 1953, for short hereinafter referred-to as "the Rules of 1953", since replaced by the Rajasthan High Court Staff Service Rules, 2002, for short hereinafter referred-to as "the Rules of 2002". Referring to the Schedule appended to the Rules of 1953 under the caption "non-gazetted post" at Serial No.5, the petitioners have recited the line of promotion i.e. from the post of Lower Division Clerk to that of Dy.Registrar (Admn.) with the intervening posts of Stamp Reporter cum Court Fee Examiner (for short hereinafter referred-to as Stamp Reporter) and Bench Reader (for short hereinafter referred-to as Court Master), above the post of U.D.C. in the hierarchy. They have averred that in the exercise of powers under Rules 4, 5, 7 and 22 of the Rules of 2002, the Chief Justice of this Court did specify the mode of recruitment and qualifications for appointment to various posts referred-to in second column of the Schedule thereto vide order dated 5.12.2002. That the nomenclature of the posts was changed by the Notification dated 24.7.2004, has been stated as well. Further, the mode of recruitment and promotion in terms of the order dated 5.12.2002 from the post of Junior Judicial Assistant (earlier designated as LDC) to that of Assistant Registrar/Court Officer, has been detailed with the assertion that the avenue for promotion from the post of Stamp Reporter to the post of Court Master, as provided under the Rules of 1953, has been sustained under the Rules of 2002 as well. The petitioners have further averred that the State Government vide Notification dated 25.1.1992 did prescribe selection scale to the ministerial and subordinate services on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years' service with a view to remove stagnation in posts. The said benefit has been extended to the staff of this Court as well. This Notification dated 25.1.1992 though has been superseded by another dated 17.2.1998, the pre-requisites for the grant of selection grades have been maintained. The petitioners have clarified that the selection grade is required to be granted as per the pay scales applicable for the promotional posts and, thus, the criteria to be applied therefor is as required for according promotions. According to the petitioners, they were initially appointed on the post of L.D.C. and thereafter promoted to that of U.D.C. and then as Stamp Reporter on various dates. That subsequent thereto, they were further promoted as Court Masters in the same pay scale as admissible to the Stamp Reporter under the Rules of 1953 on different dates as mentioned in the Schedule, has been stated. They have pleaded further that thereby, the pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000 as Stam
Click Here to Read the rest of this document