KUSUM BHATNAGAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against order dt. 15.03.2011 issued by the District Education Officer, Secondary Education, Bikaner, whereby the benefit of stepping up of petitioner's pay in terms of Rule 26A of the Rajasthan Service Rules (for short 'RSR') extended at the time of her promotion to the post of Head Mistress stands withdrawn. The petitioner has also assailed the validity of the order dt. 21.03.2011, whereby re -fixation of the petitioner's salary has been made. The petitioner entered the service of the respondents on being appointed as Teacher Gr. III on 19.09.1975. While in employment, she appeared for recruitment to the post of Teacher Gr. III. She was selected and appointed on the said post w.e.f. 23.09.1976. Vide order dt. 23.11.2011, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Head Mistress on ad hoc basis till regularly selected candidates are made available the Rajasthan Public Service Commission. The petitioner was promoted on the post of Head Mistress on regular basis against the vacancies of year 2001 -02 in pay scale of Rs. 7500 - 12000. The petitioner was given the benefit of step up of her pay in terms of Rule 26A of RSR. The petitioner has retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation w.e.f. 28.02.2011.

(2.) IT is submitted that at the time of preparing the (sic) case of the petitioner, certain objections were pointed out and (sic) thereto the benefit of step up of pay extended to the petitioner at the time of her promotion to the post of Head Mistress has been withdrawn vide order dt.15.03.2011 and the amount already paid is ordered to be recovered. Accordingly, re -fixation of the petitioner's salary has also been made vide order dt. 21.03.2011. Hence, this petition.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the benefit of step up of pay in terms of Rule 26A of RSR was against the order dt. 18.08.1992 issued by the State Government, according to which, if an employee is promoted to higher post after grant of selection scale equal to pay scale admissible to the promotional post, then, he is not entitled for benefit of stepping up. Accordingly, it is submitted that the excess amount paid has rightly been ordered to be recovered and re -fixation has also been correctly made. Learned counsel submitted that the excess amount paid can always be recovered from the retiral benefits.