GUMAN SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition was filed by petitioner- Guman Singh, seeking following relief(s): -

(2.) Admittedly, the writ petition was filed in the year 2001 when petitioner was 52 years of age and working on the post of Executive Officer (V), at present he is not in service as he has attained the age of superannuation. The petitioner was initially appointed in pursuance to the Advertisement dated 25.07.1975 (Annex.1) on the post of Executive Officer Class V initially for a period of six months on urgent temporary basis or till selected candidates are made available through RPSC. The services of the petitioner were thereafter extended from time to time and in the year 1991, a Notification (Annex.9) was issued by the Government of Rajasthan, Local-Self Department, whereby amendment was made in the Rajasthan Municipal Service Rules, 1963, whereby after item fifth of second proviso to Rule 7, a new item sixth was aided and it was specifically provided that those persons who are working temporarily or in officiating capacity up to 31.03.1979, their names shall be referred to the Commission to adjudge their suitability according to qualification prescribed for the post at the time of their appointment, their appointment shall be terminated immediately in case they are not adjudged suitably.

(3.) According to petitioner, his case was considered as per above amendment and he was appointed Executive Officer (IV) vide order dated 10.12.1998 but benefit with respect to seniority was not granted to him with effect from initial date of appointment, therefore, in view of Full Bench judgment Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of The Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officer's Association & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. reported in 1990 (2) SLR (SC) 769, he is entitled for seniority and other benefits with effect from his initial appointment and also entitled for consequential benefits, which has been denied without any rhyme or reason. It is thus prayed that second proviso to Rule 7 of the Rules as it stands comes in the way of the petitioner then the date '1.3.1973' as occurring in Clause (iii) of second proviso to r.7 of the Rules and also the words 'and shall be eligible for' and 'appointment in accordance with the provisions of these Rules', be struck down.