STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. JAGDISH NARAIN CHATURVEDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave aranted.

(2.) In these cases the State of Rajasthan had questioned correctness of the judgment rendered by different benches of the Rajasthan High Court allowing the Writ Petitions filed by the respondent in each case. The basic issue was whether ad hoc appointment or appointments on daily wage or work charge basis are appointments made to the cadre/service in accordance with the provisions contained in the recruitment rules contemplated by the Government Orders dated 25.1.1992 dated 17.2.1998. It is the stand of the appellants that they are not, while the respondents contend to the contrary. The cases at hand relate to the appointments made under the Rajasthan Subordinate Offices Ministerial Staff Rules, 1957 (in short the 'Ministerial Staff Rules'), the Rajasthan Engineering Subordinate Service (Irrigation Branch) Rules, 1967 (in short the 'Irrigation Branch Rules'), the Work Charged Employees Services Rules, 1964 (in short Work Charged Rules), the Rajasthan Agricultural Subordinate Service Rules, 1978 (in short the 'Subordinate Rules'), the Rajasthan Forest Subordinate Service Rules, 1963 (in short the 'Forest Subordinate Rules'), Rajasthan Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad Service Rules, 1959 (in short the 'Panchayat Service Rules') and the Rajasthan Secretariat Ministerial Service Rules, 1970 (in short the 'Ministerial Service Rules').

(3.) Stand of the appellants essentially is that the stagnation benefits are given from the date of regularization. It is submitted that this question has been decided in State of Haryana vs. Haryana Veterinary & AHTS Association and Anr., 2000 8 SCC 4. It is the stand of the State that the stagnation benefits are given since chance of promotion is not there. There is no question of any regularization if the proficiency test is not passed. Circulars relied upon by the employees refer to regular service.