HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1781/2022

Anamika Goyal D/o Late Shri Chandra Prakash Goyal, Aged

About 32 Years, R/o Sunder Colony, Bahadurpur Road, Ramgarh

District Alwar Rajasthan

----Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,

Department Of Panchayati Raj (Elementary Education)

Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan

2.

Director Elementary Education, Rajasthan Bikaner

3.

Additional Chief Executive Officer (Elementary Education),

Zila Parishad, Alwar (Raj.)

4.

District Elementary Education Officer, Alwar Rajasthan

5.

Block Elementary Education Officer, Ramgarh, Alwar,

Rajasthan

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mrs. Sudesh Kasana

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Bharat Saini, AGC

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH

Order

18/05/2022

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in

this writ petition has been considered and decided by the Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court in the matter of Jyoti Khatri Vs. State

of Rajasthan & Ors (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12231/2016)

wherein on 20.12.2021 following order was passed;

“The present petition has been filed with

the prayer for the confirmation and

regularization of the services of the

petitioner and also for the fixation of

regular pay-scale and other benefits.

The case of the petitioner is that she was

offered a compassionate appointment on

(2 of 3)

[CW-1781/2022]

the post of Teacher Grade-III vide Order

dated 26.02.2014 and since then she is

performing on the said post without any

hindrance. The petitioner completed her

probation period on 26.02.2016 and after

the same she applied for regularization of

the services and fixation of the regular

payscale but till date no orders for the said

reliefs have been passed by the said

Department.

Hence, the present petition has been filed.

Reply has been filed on behalf of the State

Government taking the stand that the

Government issued an order dated

22.08.2014, whereby the Grade Pay of

Teacher Grade-III has been increased from

Grade Pay-10 to Grade Pay-11 w.e.f.

01.07.2013 for the post of Teacher Grade-

III. Therefore, the petitioner could not have

been appointed under the Rajasthan

Compassionate Appointment of Dependents

of Deceased Government Servant Rules,

1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules

of 1996) on the said post.

It has further been averred that in

pursuance to the order dated 22.08.2014,

letter dated 02.09.2014 was issued by the

Director, Elementary Education directing

the implementation of the said order.

Therefore it has been contended that the

appointment of the petitioner was

erroneous and in light of the order dated

22.08.2014, all such candidates would be

granted a fresh appointment on the post of

LDC.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties

and perused the material available on

record.

Admittedly, in furtherance to the alleged

order dated 22.08.2014, no effective order

has been passed by the Department and

the petitioner continues to be in service on

the same post till date.

Moresoover, Rule 6(2) of the Rules of 1996

provides as under:

“Once an appointment has

been made on any post

under these Rules, the

benefit intended under

these rules shall be

deemed to have been

availed and the case shall

not be re-opened for

appointment to any other

(3 of 3)

[CW-1781/2022]

post

under

any

circumstances.”

A perusal of the above provision makes the

intention of the Legislature clear. It cannot

be said that the provision would apply only

to the detriment of the employees and not

for the benefit of them.

A provision cannot be termed to be a tool in

the hands of the employer to use whenever

it is not beneficial for the employee and not

to be operated whenever it is vice-versa.

In the present case, the petitioner had

been appointe