Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
REKHA BORANA, J.
Nirmal Prakash Bissa S/o Govind Prakash Bissa – Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5375 of 2020
Decided On : 30-01-2023
Government Servants Rules, 1996 - Rule 9 - Appointment - Possessing required computer qualification - Placed under probation - Case of petitioner is that even prior to his appointment, he was possessing required computer qualification and had also cleared type test from a recognized institution - Therefore, neither was he required to pass type test again nor was he required to obtain computer qualification in terms of notification – An employee appointed under Rules of 1996 is required to clear type test within a period of three years of appointment.
Finding of the Court :
Cumulative reading of appointment order and Rule 9 of Rules of 1996 is that an employee appointed under Rules of 1996 is required to clear type test within a period of three years of appointment - He would not be entitled to be confirmed till he passes examination - Further, he would be liable to be terminated also if he fails to pass examination - But only detriment of not clearing said examination within a period of three years is that he would not be entitled to annual grade increments - Meaning thereby, he would be confirmed with effect from date of his completion of probation period but would not be entitled to annual grade increments till he clears type test - Impugned order whereby period of probation of petitioner was extended cannot be held to be valid and same is therefore, quashed and set aside.
Result: Petition disposed of.
ORDER :
1. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was granted compassionate appointment after the death of his father vide order dated 28.02.2014 and was placed under probation for a period of two years.
2. As per the condition of the petitioner’s appointment order dated 28.02.2014, he was to acquire the computer qualification in terms of the notification dated 05.07.2010 within a period of one year of his appointment and further to pass the type test organized by the Department of Language in terms of the notification dated 07.09.2009 within a period of three years.
3. The petitioner completed his probation period on 11.03.2016 and was therefore, recommended by the Departmental Authorities for confirmation but vide letter dated 26.08.2016 issued by the Office of the Superintending Engineer, Jaipur, it was communicated that the certificate qua the computer qualification submitted by the petitioner was not in terms of notification dated 05.07.2010 and therefore, it was directed that the required computer qualification certificate be called from the petitioner so that further proceedings for his confirmation may be undertaken.
4. In pursuance to the said directions, the petitioner appeared in the type test organized by the Department of Language on 25.01.2017 and also in the RSCIT Examination which he cleared on 05.08.2017. After the clearing of the said examination, the petitioner was confirmed and vide order dated 26.03.2018, the probation period of the petitioner was extended till 05.08.2017. Meaning thereby, he was confirmed with effect from 05.08.2017.
5. The case of the petitioner is that even prior to his appointment, he was possessing the required computer qualification and had also cleared the type test from a recognized institution. Therefore, neither was he required to pass the type test again nor was he required to obtain the computer qualification in terms of the notification dated 05.07.2010.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner Ms Archana Purohit submitted that as the petitioner was already possessing the required qualifications, he ought to have been confirmed with effect from the date when he completed his probation period and not w.e.f. 05.08.2017. She submitted that the only requirement in terms of notification dated 05.07.2010 was a Diploma in Computer Science/Computer Application from a university established by law in India or from an institute recognized by the Government. So far as the petitioner is concerned, he was in possession of a Diploma Certificate in Computer Application from the Rajasthan Consultancy Organization Limited (RAJCON) which is an institute recognized by the State Government. Further, he was also in possession of a Certificate in Computer Language course completed under the Sarva Computer Saksharta Mission, which is an institute certified by the Government of India. Therefore, the petitioner was already qualified in terms of the notification dated 05.07.2010.
7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that in view of the specific condition of the appointment order, the petitioner was required to obtain the essential computer qualification within a period of one year of the appointment and the type test qualification within a period of three years of the appointment. She submitted that admittedly, the said qualifications as required vide the appointment order, had not been attained by the petitioner within the required period and therefore, he was rightly confirmed with effect from the date when he acquired those essential qualifications.
8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
9. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner was granted the compassionate appointment in terms of the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment Dependants of Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 1996’). Rule 9 of the said Rules was amended in the year 2009 and the then existing Rule 9 was subs
Rule 9 reads as Procedural Requirement etc.
The court ruled that amendments to the qualification rules for LDCs eliminate the requirement for a type test for compassionate appointees who have acquired necessary computer proficiency.
The court held that the delay in conducting a required typing test was attributable to the department, not the petitioner, warranting modification of service confirmation date.
The amended Rules of 1999 clarify that the educational qualification for LDC includes senior secondary education and computer proficiency, removing the type test requirement.
Seniorities should be computed based on initial appointment dates, regardless of subsequent qualification delays.
Petitioner cannot claim reversion or fresh appointment on a post which he had not held at the time of appointment under Rules, 1974.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
