GYAN CHAND MATHUR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved by the order dated 3.2.1997 by which benefit of second and third selection scale granted to him by orders dated 19.9.1992 and 24.4.1996 was withdrawn.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed on the post of L.D.C. with the respondents on 12.2.1969. He was thereafter promoted on the post of U.D.C. The petitioner was granted the benefit of second selection scale by order dated 19.9.1992 with effect from 25.1.1992 in the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2600. This second selection scale was granted to him on completion of 18 years of service and subsequently when he was able to get third promotion, the respondents by order dated 24.4.1996 granted to him benefit of third selection scale with effect from 13.2.1996 in the pay scale of Rs. 1640-2900. It so happened that the respondents by order dated 18.11.1996 promoted the petitioner on the post of Office Assistant, albeit on ad hoc basis, subject to review and revision for a period of six months. The petitioner submitted an application before the respondents on 12.12.1996 in which he expressed his inability to accept the promotion and thereby proceed to Bharatpur where he was posted, on account of family circumstances. His promotion was cancelled by order dated 23.12.1996. Subsequently, petitioner was promoted on regular basis on the post of Office Assistant vide order dated 21.3.1998 against the vacancy of the year 1997-98 and upon attaining the age of superannuation, he retired from service on 30.9.2008.

(3.) Shri Prahlad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the promotion granted to the petitioner by order dated 18.11.1996 even if declined by him for personal difficulty by application dated 12.12.1996, the action of the respondents to punish him by order dated 4.12.1996, for the reason that petitioner had forgone promotion on 18.11.1996, is not justified. Learned counsel submitted that the Government in its Department of Finance has issued a Circular dated 18.10.1993 wherein it is provided that Government servants, who are promoted to the next higher post after grant of third selection scale and who forgo the chance of promotion, would continue to draw pay in that selection grade. In 1996, when the petitioner was offered promotion and he did not accept that promotion firstly because that promotion was on ad hoc basis subject to review and revision for a limited period of six months and secondly the Circular dated 18.10.1993 was in vogue according to which the benefit of selection scale granted should not have been withdrawn. Learned counsel however argued that even if the Circular dated 4.10.1996 now relied by the respondents is accepted, according to para 3 of it, the respondents could not withdraw the benefit of second and third selection scale because the petitioner soon after accepted the promotion when it was granted to him on regular basis on 21.3.1998. Learned counsel referred to a subsequent Circular of the Finance Department issued on 31.12.2009, in para 18 of which it is provided that if a regular promotion has been offered but is refused by the employee before becoming entitled to a financial upgradation, no financial upgradation shall be allowed as such an employee has been stagnated due to lack of opportunities. 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. Learned counsel submitted that even according to last Circular which respondents issued, such benefit could not be withdrawn from the petitioner.