RAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter pertains to grant of appropriate selection grades to the petitioner as per Government order dated 25.01.1992. It is staled by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in pursuance of order dated 25.01.1992 passed by the State Government for granting selection scale, the petitioner was entitled to be fixed on the pay scale of Foreman-I as held by this Court in S.B.C.W.P. No. 3631/2008 (Sohan Lal Mathur vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) decided on 17.11.2008, wherein this Court while deciding identical controversy held that the pay scales applicable for the posts of Fitter-I and Foreman-II are same, therefore, as per para 5 of the Government notifications dated 25.01.1992 and 17.02.1998, the employee was required to receive the next higher pay. Learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that in the present matter the pay scale of Pump Driver-I and Foreman-II are same and, therefore, as per para 5 of the Government notification dated 25.11992, the petitioner was entitled to receive second selection grade of Rs. 1400-2600 instead of Rs. 1200-2050.

(2.) Mr. Vimal Mathur accepts notice on behalf of respondents and agreed that the controversy involved in this petition is squarely covered by the decision dated 17.11.2008 rendered in S.B.C.W.P. No. 3631/2008 (Sohan Lal Mathur vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) decided on 17th Nov., 2008 but prayed for time to file reply to the writ petition.

(3.) The judgment passed by this Court in Sohan Lal Mathur's case was challenged by the State Government before the Division Bench of this Court by way of D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 607/2010 and the Division Bench vide judgment dated 19.5.2011 dismissed the same and confirmed the judgment dated 17.11.2008 passed in Sohan Lal Mathur's case. In a similar matter, a special leave petition (being SLP No. 6138/2010) was also preferred on behalf of the State Government before the Hon'ble Apex Court, which came to be dismissed vide order dated 26.4.2010, however, the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 26.4.2010 dismissed the same.