ORDER :

This intra-court appeal has been filed by the appellant-State challenging the order dated 22.10.2018 passed by learned Single Judge wherein he upheld the order dated 18.04.2017 passed by Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur.

2. Ms. Sheetal Mirdha - learned AAG submits that the impugned order passed by learned Single Judge has been passed while ignoring the applicability of circular dated 04.03.1998 as the same was made applicable w.e.f. 01.01.1998 and the respondent-employee had already superannuated on 28.02.1997.

3. Learned AAG submitted that the grievance raised by the respondent-employee was in respect of not granting the benefit of selection scale on completion of 9-18-27 years of service as per the circular dated 25.01.1992.

4. Learned AAG submitted that initially the appeal filed by the respondent-employee was dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 09.01.2004, however on writ petition being filed before this Court, the High Court vide order dated 24.11.2005 had set aside the order of the Tribunal dated 09.01.2004 and had remanded the matter back to the Tribunal to decide the appeal afresh.

5. Learned AAG submitted that the respondent-employee was initially appointed as work-charge employee on 23.10.1965 and he was declared as semi-permanent on 22.10.1967 and later on he was brought on regular cadre on 01.03.1979.

6. Learned AAG submitted that the respondent-employee was granted benefit of first selection scale on completion of 9 years of service by counting his service w.e.f. 01.03.1979 and as such, since respondent-employee had completed 18 years of service on 01.03.1997, however, on account of attaining age of superannuation on 28.02.1997, the respondent was not entitled for grant of benefit of selection scale on completion of 18 years of service.

7. Learned AAG submitted that the Tribunal, while allowing the appeal filed by the respondent, vide order dated 18.04.2017 has taken into account the different circulars dated 28.02.1994, 04.03.1998 and 24.03.2011. Learned AAG further submitted that since the respondent-employee, had already attained age of superannuation and circular dated 04.03.1998 was made applicable w.e.f. 01.01.1998, the Tribunal without going into such an important aspect of the matter and without there being any challenge to the said order, passed the impugned order dated 18.04.2017.

8. Learned AAG further submitted that the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellants without even considering the applicability of the circular and only a reference has been made that the same was issued on 04.03.1998. Learned AAG further submitted that findings of the learned Single Judge without discussing the applicability of the circular in detail is also incorrect, as the impugned order passed by the learned Tribunal did not deal with the issue of applicability of the circular dated 04.03.1998.

9. Learned AAG further submitted that after decision of the State Government to regularize the work-charge employees by various orders, such work-charge employees were brought on regular cadre on completion of 10 years of service by issuing the order dated 28.02.1994.

10. Learned AAG submitted that another circular dated 20.09.1995 was issued by the State Government whereby State Government had decided to grant benefit of selection scale to such work-charge employees after their regularization and they were also held entitled for selection scale on completion of 9-18-27 years of service after such employees being brought on regular establishment.

11. Learned AAG submitted that on a request and demand being mad