STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. MAHESH ROOP RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the appellants as well as caveator.

(2.) THE facts as revealed on the record of this case goes to show that the respondent Mahesh Roop Ral was appointed as Agricultural Extension Officer on 30.9.1963 and approved by R.P.S.C. on 28.4.1964 and thereafter, he was confirmed w.e.f 30.10.1971. The said incumbent finding that another person Shri Rajendra Singh who was appointed and approved by R.P.S.C. later than him and was confirmed on the post of Farm Manager on 30.11.1971, at the relevant time the incumbent respondent was assigned seniority at Serial No. 386 and Shri Rajendra Singh was assigned at Serial No. 466 as Agricultural Extension Officer, on the next higher post of Assistant Marketing Officer also respondent petitioner was promoted w.e.f. 1.8.1978 whereas the said Rajendra Singh was promoted w.e.f. 22.5.1979 but thereafter, the said Rajendra Singh was promoted as District Agricultural Officer vide order dated 23.2.1980, and that respondent petitioner have been shown junior to said Rajendra Singh. Then Shri Mahesh Roop Rai filed an allpeal No. 184/80 before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal Rajasthan, Jaipur. The petitioner's claim was that a person junior to him has been promoted on the next higher cadre without considering his case and therefore, he is entitled to be considered and promoted to the next higher cadre with effect from the date any person junior to him has been so considered and appointed. The State has taken the plea that Rajendra Singh has challenged the seniority list by which he has been assigned seniority on the basis of date of confirmation. That suit was decreed on 19.11.1975 and the said Rajendra Singh was deemed to be confirmed as Farm Manager w.e.f. 16.8.1966. That decree was modified on appeal and the date of confirmation was shifted from 16.8.1966 to 16.2.1968. Accordingly, said Rajendra Singh was confirmed on the Subordinate Agricultural post w.e.f. 16.2.1968 and he was assigned seniority at No. 194A in the Subordinate Agricultural Service and because of that he has been considered for promotion before the petitioner -respondent.

(3.) THE petitioner has filed present petition in the year 1996 some time before his superannuation asking for the mandamus to implement the order of the Tribunal so that he can get the consequential benefits. The only reply of the State was that there is an interim order passed by the High Court at Jaipur on 6.4.1983 which is operating against the implementation of the order dated 15.3.1982. Therefore, State Government is not in the position to implement the order. When matter came up for hearing on 6.1.2000 the learned Single Judge of this Court was informed that writ petition by Rajendra Singh had been dismissed and interim order has come to an end. In these circumstances, the court ordered that the since petition against the order passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur has been dismissed there is no impediment in implementing the order of the Tribunal for which a direction is sought by the petitioner. The petition was disposed of with the direction to implement the order passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur as expeditiously as possible.