VIJAYENDRA SINGH HERA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE services of Shri V.S. Hera, a surplus temporary Regional Inspector of Local Bodies appointed temporarily as Assistant Sales Tax Officer (subsequently re -designated as Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer) in the Commercial Taxes Department are hereby terminated, with immediate effect, as he failed to pass the departmental examination as required, and within the time allowed, by Rule 12 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Absorption of Surplus Personnel) Rules, 1969. By Order of the Governor. Sd/ - ( S.L. Joshi ) Deputy Secretary to Government.

(2.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner contends firstly, that the Departmental Examinations are prescribed for promotion and confirmation only and not (or making any substantive appointment and the before the failure to pass such examination could not be a ground for termination of service; secondly, although the State Government, by its notice dated 3 -6 -1972, called upon the petitioner to pass the Departmental Examination by December 11, 1972, no opportunity was given to him to take the examination and therefore, the order of termination of his service is bad; and thirdly, the petitioner having been selected by the Public Service Commission, the termination of his service can be only in accordance with Rule 23A of the Rajasthan Service Rules. Even if treated as an temporary employee, he was entitled to one month's notice or one month's pay in lieu of such notice and unless this condition is satisfied, the order of the termination of his service was void.

(3.) NOTHING really turns on the direction contained in the notice dated June 3, 1972. that the period of two years from December 11, 1969, the date when the Rajasthan Civil Services (Absorption of Surplus Personnel) Rules, 1969, could be further extended by a period of one year and unless the petitioner fails to pass the Departmental Examination before December 11, 1972, necessary action would be taken for the termination of the of services of the petitioner. That was but an act of grace. Unfortunately, no Departmental Examination was held during he extended period and therefore the petitioner cannot claim benefit thereunder. The petitioner was appointed temporarily, by transfer, as Assistant Sales -tax Officer on November 13, 1962 for a period of six months. He appeared in the Departmental Examination only once, held in May 1965. Thereafter, he made an application for appearing at the Departmental Examination which was held in May 1969, but remained absent, and thereafter in all the Departmental Examinations held in May 1970. May 1971 and May 1972, the petitioner did not avail of the opportunities. He had no right to appear in the Departmental Examination after 5 years.