RAJENDRA PRASAD DUBE Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S .C. Agarwal, J 1. Rajendra Prasad Dube, the petitioner in this writ petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitntion of India, is an employe of the Government of Rajasthan. He entered service on 23 12 1959 when he was appointed on the post of designer in the Industries Department of the Government of Rajasthan in the pay scale Rs. 110 -225. By order (Ann. I) dated 19.9.1962 he was pronoted to the post of powerlloom Instructor in the pay scale of Rs. 1 5 -335, which was scale No. 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised) Pay Rules, 1961, here in after referred to as the Revised Pay Rules). Due to abolition of certain posts the petitioner was declared as surplus. On the basis of the recommendations of the Absorption Committee constituted in accordance with the terms of the circular of the Government of Rajasthan dated 12.6.1962 relating to absorption of surplus personnel the petitioner was absorbed on the post of Teacher Grade II (crafts) by order (Ann. 2) dated 16.9.1963. As the petitioner was not a graduate and garaduation was a necessary qualification for appointment to the post of Teacher in Crafts, the Absorption Committee decided to relax the condition of graduation in the case of the petitioner. It appears that after being absorbed on the post of Craft Teacher the petitioner was placed in Pay Scale Rs. 115 -200 (Scale No. 13 in the Revised Pay Rules). When the pay of the petitioner reached the stage of Rs. 165/ - his increments were stopped and he came to know that he had been fixed in pay Scale No. 13 and not in Pay Scale No. 16, and that in Pay Scale No. 13, he could not get future increments without fulfilling the qualification for crossing the efficiency bar. The petitioner, thereupon made a representation for his being allowed to cross the efficiency bar and his being fixed in the Pay Scale Rs. 115 -335 (Pay scale No. 16 of the Revised Fay Rules. By letter (Anx. 18) dated March 5/6, 1969 addressed by the Dy. Director, Education, J.B. Range, Jodhpur to the Head Master, P.B N.H.S. School, Sujangarh it was intimated that the petitioner could not be permitted to cross the efficiency bar in view of the Finance Department notification dated 7.10.1967 since he is neither trained nor he is a Shastric Acharya graduate nor he possessed ten years' teaching experience prior to 1.9.1961. The petitioner made further representations piaying that he should be fixed in pay scale No. 6 of the Revised Pay Rules but no action was taken on the said repretsentations and there upon he filed this writ petition in this Court wherein he has prayed that an appropriate writ, order or direction may be issued directing the respondents to fix the petitioner in pay Scale No. 6 on and from the date on which he was appeinted Teacher Grade II (Craft) and to give to the petitioner all benefits constquential there to in respect of emoluments, pay etc. In the writ petition it has further been prayed that if it be found that the petitioner is not entitled to be fixed in pay Scale No. 16, the respondents may be directed to allow the petitioner to cross the efficiency bar in Scale No. 13 on and from the dated 9.1.1965 with all consequential benefits there to such as emoluments, pay etc.

(2.) IN the writ petition the petitioner has submitted that prior to his being declared as surplus the petitioner was holding the post of powerloom instructor in the Pay Scale Rs. 115 -335 (Scale No. 16 of the Revised Pay Rules) and after his absorption on the post of Craft Teacher the petitioner was entitled to be placed in the same Pay Scale i.e. pay scale No. 16, and since at the time of his absorption on the post of Craft Teacher the Absorption Committee had relaxed the condition of Gsaduation, the petitioner could not be denied fixation in pay scale No. 16 on the ground that he did not possess the qualification of graduation that was prescribed for recruitment 10 the post of Craft Teacher. In the writ petition the petitioner has also submitted that other persons similarly situate and who also do not possess the qualification of graduation, have been fixed in pay scale No. 16 whereas the petitioner has been denied fixation in the aforesaid Pay Scale. In this regard the petitioner has mentioned the name of Vishwanath Agrawal and was pointed out that he has also passed the Intermediate examination as the petitioner and that both the petitioner and Vishwanath Agrawal are craft trained but Vishwa Nath Agarwal has been placed in Pay Scale No. 16 where as the petitioner has been placed in Pay Scale No. 16 and that the petitioner has thus been arbitrarily discriminated in violation of the provisions of Article 16 of the Constitution.

(3.) NO reply to the writ petition and the additional affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents.