STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. SHIV LAHARI SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Rajasthan has filed this writ petition challenging the order of Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, dated 22/29.1.82 whereby the order, dated 20.10.1975, of compulsory retirement of the non - petitioner was set aside and he was directed to be reinstated with all consequential benefits. The petition has a chequred history. Having joined service in 1950 as Plant Protection Supervisor in the Department of Agriculture, he subsequently was selected and appointed in Rajasthan Administrative Services w. e f. 31.8.1962. His date of superannuation in normal course was 31.12.1982. He however, was compulsorily retired under Rule 244 (2) of Rajasthan Service Rules vide order, dated 22.10.1975. He challenged this order of compulsory retirement and filed an appeal before the Rajasthan Civil Service Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur. The Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 12.2.1979 dismissed the appeal upholding the order of compulsory retirement. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the Tribunal the non - petitioner filed S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 795/79, Shri Shiv. Lahari Vs. State of Rajasthan . Learned Single Judge of this court dismissed that writ petition on 26.10.79. Shiv Lahari thereafter filed D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 151 of 1979 which too was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court on 10.12.1979. The petitioner having been not satisfied with the order of the Service Tribunal and the two judgments of this court knocked the door of the Supreme Court by filing Special Leave Petition which was refused vide order dated 28.4.80. Thus on one side the order dated 22.10.75 compulsorily retiring the petitioner was upheld up to Supreme Court.

(2.) The non - petitioner on the other hand continued his remedy before the Government and this opportunity was provided to him by the Government itself. Government of Rajasthan on 22.4.77 passed an order No. F. 13(42) Karmik/ACR whereby it communicated its decision that those Government servants who are retired under Rule 244(2) of the Rajasthan Service Rules as amended by Finance Department Notification No. 1(50) FD Group -11/75 dated 25.11.1975 on completing of 20 years qualifying service ( the one under which the non-petitioner was retired ) and had not attained the age of 50 years at the time of passing order under Rule 244(2) of the R. S. R. , shall be taken into Government service. They were asked to make representations. The non-petitioner being entitled to the revocation of the order on the ground that he had neither completed 50 years of age nor had 25 years qualifying service on the date of retirement order, made representations. The Government of Rajasthan rejected his representation vide letter, dated 7.6.78. The non-petitioner submitted that his representation was filed on 31.5.77 which was a detailed one. He had made several other representations. One on communicating the rejections of the representations except that of 31.5.77 which was made pursuant to Government Circular dated 24.3.77. Guidelines have been provided by the Government in the aforesaid circular which was filed as Ex. 10 before the Tribunal and despite the fact that communications had been made to the non-petitioner for rejection of his representations no mention had been Made to the representation dated 31.5.77 which was required to be considered unless it was communicated to him vide letter dated 4.4.81. Considering this. letter to be an order of rejection of the representation a fresh appeal was filed before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal on 25.5.81, i.e., subsequent to dismissal of the case in Supreme Court.

(3.) The appeal was opposed by the State on two grounds - one is that the appeal was barred by limitation and secondly it was barred by the principles of constructive res judicata as compulsory retirement had already been upheld upto the Supreme Court of India. The Tribunal did not accept both the objections of the State and this time accepted the appeal vide order, dated 22/29.1.1982. It is this order of the Tribunal accepting the appeal, has been challenged in this writ petition.