STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. DAYA LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The first matter relates to persons temporarily appointed as Assistant Superintendents in 1985 and 1986 in aided hostels. The prefix Assistant was omitted in 1996 and thereafter the Respondents were known as Superintendents. The second matter relates to a person temporarily appointed as a Superintendent on 30.6.1998 in an aided hostel. They filed writ petitions contending that they were employed on full-time basis and were discharging functions similar to those of Superintendents in Government hostels, but were being paid only a meagre salary while their counterparts in Government hostels are paid much higher pay in the scale of Rs. 4000-6100 in the category (A) and (B) Hostels and Rs. 3200-4900 in category C hostels. They sought regularization in the posts of Hostel Superintendent from the date of initial appointment and payment of salary on par with hostel Superintendent of class C hostels of the Social Welfare Department.

(3.) The respective Respondents in the remaining eight appeals, claim that they were appointed in the years 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998, as part-time cooks/chowkidars in government hostels run by Social Welfare Department. They claim that their appointment orders were issued by the respective Mess Committee of the hostel where they were employed; that the State Government was paying a fixed amount of Rs. 600/- per month in the form of aid to the concerned Hostel Mess Committee which, in turn, was being paid to them as remuneration. The State Government issued an order dated 28.12.1998, stopping the practice of appointing Class IV employees on consolidated wages and to remove any person appointed on that basis. By subsequent circular dated 21.1.1999, the District Social Welfare Officers were directed to remove part time chowkidars/cooks employed by the Department with effect from 1.2.1999 and replace them by ex-servicemen or widows of ex-servicemen. In view of the Government directives, the Respondents apprehended their services may be dispensed with. (The services of two of the Respondents - Madan Lal Yogi and Kurda Ram who were appointed on 15.7.1995 and 1.7.1995 respectively were however terminated even earlier, on 17.3.1997 and 28.12.1998). The Respondents submitted that this Court had earlier approved a scheme under which part time cooks and chowkidars who were working as on 1.5.1995 were regularized; and that as they (Respondents) were all appointed subsequent to 1.5.1995 and were not therefore covered under the said scheme, a fresh scheme should be framed to benefit them. They therefore sought a declaration that the circulars dated 28.12.1998 and 1.2.1999, were invalid and a direction for regularization by framing an appropriate scheme similar to the scheme framed by the State Government in pursuance of the order dated 26.5.1995 of the Rajasthan High Court in --Anshkalin Samaj Kalyan Sangh, Banswara v. The State of Rajasthan WP No. 3453/1994.