HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18020/2015

Rajasthan Rajya Bunker Sahakari Sangh Limited Employees

Union Through President Girwar Singh Gehlot, Registered Office

At Handloom Bhawan, Near Laxmi Mandir Cinema, Tonk Road,

Jaipur

----Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan Through Chief Secretary, State

Secretariat, Jaipur

2.

The Principal Secretary, Finance, State Secretariat, Jaipur

3.

The Principal Secretary/director Industries, State

Secretariat, Jaipur

4.

The Registrar Corporative Society, Nehru Sehkar Bhawan,

22 Godown, Jaipur

5.

The Managing Director, Rajasthan Rajya Bunkar Sehkari

Sangh Ltd., Handloom Bhawan, Near Laxmi Mandir

Cinema, Tonk Road, Jaipur

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Neeraj Kumar Sharma

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Ram Kumar Sharma

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

Judgment reserved on 07/03/2022

Judgment pronounced on 14/03/2022

1.

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner

employees’ Union being aggrieved against the non-grant of

benefits of Sixth Pay Commission as per Rajasthan Civil Services

(Revised Pay Scale) Rules, 2008.

2.

The respondent No.5 is an Apex Co-operative Institution of

State Government, which is functioning since 1957. There is no

separate service rules of respondent no.5 and therefore, in the

(2 of 4)

[CW-18020/2015]

meeting of Managing Committee dated 29.09.1983, Rajasthan

Service Rules, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as R.S.R.) were

adopted. Since R.S.R. are adopted in whole (except Pension

rules), all salary, service conditions and allowances are being

awarded as per the contention of the petitioner.

3.

When the recommendation of Sixth Pay Commission came

into force in the year 2008, admittedly respondent no.5 was

running in cumulative loss and accordingly, in the light of Circular

dated 31.10.2008, guidelines for granting benefit of Rules of 2008

were laid down by the Standing Committee under the

Chairmanship of Chief Secretary whereby, as per Clause 3 of the

said circular, the benefit of Rules of 2008 i.e. Sixth Pay

Commission could be extended to the employees only on

submission of plan to overcome the losses of the society. Vide

Annexure-8, on 24.02.2014, it was held by the Chief Secretary

that Sixth Pay Commission proposal is legally not sustainable and

therefore, the same can be kept in agenda of pending list. Being

aggrieved, notice for demand of justice was served upon the

respondents and the present petition was filed.

4.

The contention of respondents is that respondent no.5 is

running in cumulative loss, their financial position and liquidity is

not permitting the payment of Sixth Pay Commission. The

petitioner cannot be called similarly situated to other corporations

and State Government employees as they are Co-operative

Society and therefore, various judgments cited by the petitioner

are distinguishable as neither they are Co-operative Society in

profit nor under the employment of State Government and cannot

be equated to RTDC and RSRTC which are corporations and not

co-operatives, therefore, reliance placed upon the judgment of Co-

(3 of 4)

[CW-18020/2015]

ordinate Bench passed in SBCWP No.7621/2010 titled P.R.

Swarankar & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. is not applicable

qua them.

5.

We have considered the submissions of respective counsels,

scanned the record of the writ petition and considered the

judgment cited at Bar.

6.

The first and foremost thing is that respondent no.5 is a co-

operative wherein the process of the co-operative work for the

concept of profit and gain is on the concept of mutuality. It is an

admitted position, which is not disputed by the petitioner also that

respondent no.5 is running in cumulative loss for a long period of

time, even profit and loss cannot justify the liquidity crunch and

huge lo