Back
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Dinesh Mehta, J.
Ramesh Chandra & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13608/2018
Decided On : 23-09-2021
Entitlement - Service Benefits - N/A - The court interpreted the principles of service benefits and entitlements, emphasizing that prior judgments established the petitioners' rights to pay scales and selection grades based on their service duration, influencing the decision to grant the third selection grade.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners, appointed as LDCs in 1985, sought minimum pay grade benefits through a writ petition, which was granted. They later appealed for first and second selection grades, which were also awarded based on a fixed date of entitlement. The current petition seeks the third selection grade after 27 years of service.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondents' denial of the third selection grade was unjustified, as previous judgments had established the petitioners' entitlement based on their service duration from a specific date.
Issues: Whether the petitioners are entitled to the third selection grade after completing 27 years of service from the established date.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that once a date for entitlement was established, the respondents could not deviate from it, and the petitioners were entitled to benefits based on their service duration.
Result: The writ petition is allowed, and the respondents are directed to grant the third selection grade benefits to the petitioners.
JUDGMENT
1. Petitioners were initially appointed on the post of LDC on different dates in or around year 1985, however, the respondents had not given the benefits of minimum pay grade to the petitioners for which they approached this Court by way of filing a writ petition being DB Civil Writ Petition No.2004/1987.
2. Petitioners' aforesaid writ petition came to be allowed by the Division Bench vide order dated 11.05.1988 and it was inter alia held that petitioners would be entitled to regular pay scale from the date of filing of the writ petition i.e. 13.08.1987.
3. Operative part of the judgment aforesaid reads thus :
10. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and we direct the respondents to pay the petitioners the minimum of pay scales of the regular recruited LDCs w.e.f. 13.08.1987 but without any increments. The petitioners are also entitled to corresponding Dearness Allowance and Additional Dearness Allowance if any payable thereon."
4. The judgment of Division Bench of this Court was duly complied with by the respondents and the reckoning date of petitioners' entitlement for minimum pay scale has been recorded on 13.08.1987 by the respondents.
5. Thereafter respondents did not give benefits of first selection grade to the petitioners for which they approached Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal by way of filing appeals. The learned Tribunal allowed the appeals of the petitioners vide order dated 14.09.2001 and directed the respondents to accord the benefit of first selection grade on completion of nine years of service from 13.08.1987, the date when they were put in minimum pay scale.
6. Against the order of Tribunal, State filed writ petitions before this Court and the same were also dismissed, against which the State preferred special appeals before the Division Bench, which too were dismissed vide judgment dated 27.08.2003 in petitioners' favour reiterating/holding that the petitioners were entitled for first selection grade from 13.08.1987.
7. Accordingly, petitioners were given benefit of first selection grade by reckoning the petitioners' entitlement from 13.08.1987 vide order dated 11.02.2004.
8. Petitioners were thereafter conferred benefit of second selection scale grade vide order dated 29.09.2005, again considering petitioners' 18 years of service from 13.08.1987.
9. Petitioners have preferred the present writ petition, as the respondents have not given benefit of third selection grade after completion of 27 years of service.
10. Mr. Khileree, learned counsel for the petitioners, argued that this Court had decided in petitioners' favour on two occasions and the respondents have following the adjudication aforesaid given benefit of first selection grade and then second selection grade, hence, there is no reason for which respondents should not grant benefit of third selection grade to the petitioners when they have completed more than 27 years of service from 13.08.1987.
11. Mr. Mrigraj Singh, learned counsel for the respondents, submitted that the petitioners are not entitled for the benefit of third selection grade merely because of completion of 27 years of service from the date of 13.08.1987, inasmuch as the petitioners were regularised from different dates, after clearing type test.
12. In the opinion of this Court, when the Division Bench has held in petitioners' favour vide its judgment dated 11.05.1988 and the said date i.e. 13.08.1987 has been pegged as petitioners' date for grant of minimum pay scale or regular pay, the respondents cannot take a diverse/different view. The fact that petitioners have cleared proficiency test later has no bearing on their right to get benefit of selection grade.
13. It is to be noted that even the petitioners' entitlement for grant of first sele
The court affirmed that established service entitlements must be honored, and deviations from prior judgments are not permissible.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioners were entitled to the regular pay scale from the date of filing of the writ petition and were also entitled to the benefits of ....
The main legal point established is that relief such as selection grade and special grade should be sought within a reasonable period of time, and lack of diligent pursuit of representations during s....
Employees must receive selection grade benefits based on their actual length of service from the date of initial appointment, in accordance with governmental policy.
Entitlement to service benefits and post-retiral benefits is determined based on the service record, consideration of penalty orders, and timely implementation of entitlements.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of the petitioners to the specific pay scale as per the circular dated 25.1.1992, and the requirement for the respondents to implem....
When the appellant Board has given the benefit of first higher grade scale to some of the petitioners, at that juncture, such contention was not raised and at the time of granting the second higher g....
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
