Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Forgoing promotion preserves eligibility for selection scales by maintaining service in the same grade/post for 9/18/27 years, enabling stagnation relief; accepting promotion disqualifies selection scale in that grade (clock resets in new grade), with courts deferring final pay/scale decisions to State ["Dr. Ramashish Prasad Sinha and Ors vs The State Of Bihar - Patna"] ["Additional Chief Engineer, PHED Jaipur Zone, Jaipur VS Chhiter Mal Meena - Rajasthan"] ["KANARAM Vs. STATE WATER RESOU DEP IRRIG ORS - Rajasthan"]. No automatic higher emoluments beyond scheme; often limited to increments if scales overlap ["Additional Chief Engineer, PHED Jaipur Zone, Jaipur VS Chhiter Mal Meena - Rajasthan"].
In the realm of Rajasthan state government employment, selection scales serve as a crucial mechanism to alleviate career stagnation. But what happens when an employee, after benefiting from these scales, decides to forgo an actual promotion? The question arises: What is the effect of forgoing promotion on the grant of selection scale to employees by the State of Rajasthan?
This issue has been shaped by government circulars and judicial interpretations, balancing administrative efficiency with employee rights. While policies aim to prevent abuse, courts have imposed safeguards, particularly for pre-existing benefits and compelling circumstances. This post breaks down the key findings, policies, and exceptions—drawing from official circulars and Rajasthan High Court judgments—to help employees navigate this complex area. Note: This is general information, not specific legal advice; consult a lawyer for your case.
Selection scales, also known as selection grades, were introduced to provide financial relief to employees in Class IV, ministerial, subordinate services, and isolated posts who face prolonged stagnation without promotions. Under the Finance Department circular dated 25.01.1992 (superseded by order dated 17.02.1998), employees become eligible after 9 years (first scale, no prior promotion), 18 years (second scale, no two promotions), or 27 years (third scale, no three promotions) of service from their first regular appointment. State of Rajasthan VS Farooq Ahmed - 2004 0 Supreme(Raj) 978Chandra Pal Gupta VS State of Rajasthan - 2014 0 Supreme(Raj) 224
The 17.02.1998 order explicitly states: The first Selection Grade shall be granted from the day following the day on which one completes service of nine years, provided that the employee has not got one promotion earlier as is available in his existing cadre. Similar provisos apply to higher scales. These grants occur in the same post and scale, without affecting cadre seniority or strength, acting as upgradation to prevent stagnation rather than a higher post. State of Rajasthan VS Farooq Ahmed - 2004 0 Supreme(Raj) 978Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. VS R. Santhakumari Velusamy - 2011 0 Supreme(SC) 871
As noted in related rulings, such scales are akin to pay scale entitlements after fixed service periods where no promotion avenue exists. For instance, under schemes for municipal services, employees are entitled to the pay scale of the post of promotion in lieu thereof after nine years if ineligible for certain promotions. Bhairu Bux VS State - 2014 Supreme(Raj) 1592
The core policy addressing forgoing promotions came via the Finance Department's 04.12.1996 circular, which modified earlier instructions (e.g., 25.11.1992, 18.10.1993). It targets employees drawing second or third selection scales who then refuse actual promotions, stating: Government servant who is drawing pay in second or third selection grade if on his actual promotion to second/third promotion post forgoes the promotion the benefit of second/third selection grade... shall be withdrawn from the date he forgoes the promotion the pay of such an employee shall be refixed either in pay scale of the first promotion post or in the first selection grade... at the stage he would have drawn had he not been granted second and/third selection grade(s). Crucially, it applies prospectively: benefits for pre-circular forgoals not withdrawn, but in case such a Government servant is again offered promotion after issue of this order, the benefit... shall be withdrawn from the date he refuses. Hanuman Singh Tanwar VS State of Rajasthan - 2009 0 Supreme(Raj) 1383Chandra Pal Gupta VS State of Rajasthan - 2014 0 Supreme(Raj) 224
A refining 31.12.2009 circular clarifies: If a regular promotion has been offered but was refused by the employee before becoming entitled to a financial upgradation, no financial upgradation shall be allowed... If, however, financial upgradation has been allowed due to stagnation and the employee, subsequently refuses the promotion, it shall not be a ground to withdraw the financial upgradation. Thus, existing scales are generally preserved, with future ones deferred. Chandra Pal Gupta VS State of Rajasthan - 2014 0 Supreme(Raj) 224
Rajasthan High Court judgments have curtailed blanket withdrawals, emphasizing prospective application and protections. In the landmark Chandra Pal Gupta case, second and third scales granted in 1994 were partially affected by a 1997 refusal. The court upheld withdrawal of the third scale from 27.02.1997 (post-circular), but protected the second scale. Pre-1996 refusals (1990-1994, due to spouse's mental illness) were immune, as the circular does not apply retrospectively: Refusal to accept promotion at the fag end of his career after second/third selection grades have already been granted, cannot be the basis to withdraw such selection grade on the basis of a cause anterior to such date. Scales earned via stagnation require notice and hearing before revocation. Chandra Pal Gupta VS State of Rajasthan - 2014 0 Supreme(Raj) 224
Another ruling upheld second scale withdrawal for a post-2007 refusal, as the employee had availed the benefit despite forgoing promotion. Hanuman Singh Tanwar VS State of Rajasthan - 2009 0 Supreme(Raj) 1383 Courts stress: only regular promotions (not ad hoc/temporary) trigger effects; family/medical compulsions mitigate enforcement; no retrospective clawback. Chandra Pal Gupta VS State of Rajasthan - 2014 0 Supreme(Raj) 224
In broader contexts, courts have protected accrued scale benefits from retrospective amendments. For example, once fixed in a scale like Rs. 8000-13500, retrospective reductions to Rs. 7500-12000 violate Articles 14 and 16, as vested rights cannot be withdrawn. Ram Ratan Chouhan & etc. VS State of Rajasthan - 2006 Supreme(Raj) 3233
Several scenarios limit or prevent withdrawal:
Additionally, certain awards exclude selection scales from compliance timelines, as they are not part of specific directives. M. L. JANGID VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN - 2017 Supreme(Raj) 2251
If facing withdrawal:- Document refusals with evidence (e.g., medical certificates).- File representations citing circular provisos, Chandra Pal Gupta Chandra Pal Gupta VS State of Rajasthan - 2014 0 Supreme(Raj) 224, and demands for hearing.- Challenge via writ if arbitrary, seeking prospective refixation only.- For arrears (e.g., regularized staff), note no scales pre-joining per 2010 Rules. Jagdish Prasad Saini VS State of Rajasthan - 2022 0 Supreme(SC) 980
Departments must adhere to natural justice; unilateral recoveries without notice are quashed, as in cases withdrawing scales on audit objections without hearing. Bhairu Bux VS State - 2014 Supreme(Raj) 1592
Forgoing promotion after 04.12.1996 typically leads to withdrawal of the relevant higher selection scale (e.g., third) from the refusal date, with pay refixed—but only prospectively, preserving earlier scales and pre-circular benefits. Courts protect against overreach, especially for family hardships, ensuring scales fulfill their anti-stagnation purpose.
Key Takeaways:- Scales granted after 9/18/27 years sans promotions; conditional on no prior equivalents. State of Rajasthan VS Farooq Ahmed - 2004 0 Supreme(Raj) 978- Post-1996 refusals affect specific scales only; existing ones often safe per 2009 circular. Chandra Pal Gupta VS State of Rajasthan - 2014 0 Supreme(Raj) 224- Judicial relief for exceptions; always demand hearing.
Stay informed on circulars and rulings to safeguard your entitlements. For personalized guidance, reach out to employment law experts in Rajasthan.
#RajasthanEmploymentLaw, #SelectionScale, #EmployeeRights
Bare perusal of the writ petition would reveal that no order, either of alleged promotion on the post of ‘Mate’, or of revision of pay in the Revised Pay Scale Rules, or of grant of selection grade has been placed on record by the petitioner. ... This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to grant benefit of revised pay scale as per Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Scales) Rules, 1989 w.e.f. 01.09.1988 as well as to grant#HL....
It is common knowledge that the scheme/policy for grant of selection scales to the employees of the State Government and its instrumentalities, was introduced with a view to removing stagnation faced by members of the ministerial/ subordinate services due to non-grant of timely promotion and if the Government ... A bare perusal of the Circulars clearly reveals that the benefit of first selection grade shall be given to the employees in the pay #HL_ST....
State) and found that this Court directed the respondents to grant benefit of second and third selection grade in terms of order dated 25.01.1992, reviewed on 20.09.1995 by the State Government. The Special Appeal filed by the respondents came to be dismissed vide order dated 14.02.2008. ... Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the State Government issued circulars for granting selection grade to the employees on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service ....
That it is further relevant to state here that benefits of senior scale or selection scale are admissible and payable to such assistant teacher, who were not allowed any promotion and worked in same. ... Master, any claim for grant of selection scale is not misdirected and not justified in the eye of law. ... Grade of teachers and in respect of such teachers, provisions for grant of senior scale after completion of....
State of Rajasthan and Others. ... State. ... of selection scales to employees has been left open for consideration of the State Government. ... grade shall be given to the employees in the pay scale of next promotion post, granting selection scale, does not grant higher emoluments, then
State of Rajasthan and Others. ... State. ... of selection scales to employees has been left open for consideration of the State Government. ... grade shall be given to the employees in the pay scale of next promotion post, granting selection scale, does not grant higher emoluments, then
State of Rajasthan and Others. ... State. ... of selection scales to employees has been left open for consideration of the State Government. ... grade shall be given to the employees in the pay scale of next promotion post, granting selection scale, does not grant higher emoluments, then
State of Rajasthan and Others. ... State. ... of selection scales to employees has been left open for consideration of the State Government. ... grade shall be given to the employees in the pay scale of next promotion post, granting selection scale, does not grant higher emoluments, then
State of Rajasthan and Others. ... State. ... of selection scales to employees has been left open for consideration of the State Government. ... grade shall be given to the employees in the pay scale of next promotion post, granting selection scale, does not grant higher emoluments, then
State of Rajasthan and Others. ... State. ... of selection scales to employees has been left open for consideration of the State Government. ... grade shall be given to the employees in the pay scale of next promotion post, granting selection scale, does not grant higher emoluments, then
The grant of selection scale and promotion was therefore, not a part of the award and the same cannot be interpreted to cover grant of selection scale and promotions on the basis of judgment delivered by the High Court in "Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Dholpur Through Its Secretary v. Bangali Mal Sharma & Anr." (supra).
If he is not able to gain promotion in a span of nine years, he is entitled to pay scale of the post of promotion in lieu thereof. Although it is true that in the regular channel, a class IV under the Rajasthan Municipal (Subordinate & Ministerial Service) Rules, 1963 is entitled to promotion on the post of Jamadar, but that avenue of promotion is available to those, who were not eligible to claim promotion on the post of LDC. Wherever there is no avenue of promotion, the scheme also provides for corresponding pay scale in which such employees can be granted selection grade.#HL_END....
To that extent, we are satisfied that in the facts of present case grant of benefit of selection scale would be as good as promotion. They would, in that case, be required to review all the promotions granted at various levels to so many persons. But the question that then arises whether, despite entitlement of the writ petitioner to selection scale on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service, should he be denied the actual benefits only for the reason that he has not actually rendered service? On the record, we find the order dated 11.05.1967 by which the writ petitione....
1. - This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer that respondents be directed to open the sealed cover containing recommendations of Departmental Promotion Committee qua him for promotion to the scale of Rajasthan Administrative Service against vacancies of 1987- 88 and grant him promotion to selection scale w.e.f. 21.4.1988 when his juniors were so promoted and further that he should be held entitled to all consequential benefits with interest @ 18% per annum.
This scheme is intended to remove stagnation in service where the employees without getting any promotion are made to work on the same post for number of years. Moreover, whether such a retrospective pay revision can be allowed to be made when the rule making authority itself did not intend to make the amended rules effective from a date earlier than 1st July, 1998. But core of the question is that when a certain category of employees has already been fixed in a particular scale, whether the respondents by retrospectively amending the rules can take away the benefit which has been derived by....
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
