NARESHWAR LAL JOSHI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petitions being of identical nature were called on for hearing together and they can conveniently be disposed of by a common judgment. The relevant facts may be stated with reference to Nareshwarlal Joshi's writ petition.

(2.) NARESHWARLAL Joshi started his career as a Government servant as Assistant Teacher in the Government High School, Bhilwara which was at that time in the former Udaipur State. He was appointed as such on 3-8-1941. Thereafter he had a number of appointments and on 14-11-1958, shortly before the formation of the United State of Rajasthan, he was Instructor in the S. T. G. Training School at Shahpura in the grade of Rs. 150-15-300. On 4-7-60 by order Ex. I, he was appointed to officiate as Headmaster in the grade of Rs, 250-500 and posted at S. T. G. Training School, Ladnun. On 23. 6. 61 he came to be transferred as Headmaster at the Government School, Bhensrodgarh. This appointment became effective from 1-7-1961. He continued on that post till 3-7 63 and was drawing a salary of Rs. 280/ at the time and Rs. 40/- as D. A. per month. He then came to be reverted as Assistant Teacher and was posted at Government Higher Secondary School at Bhilwara in the grade of Rs. 100-15 225. He was allowed a salary of Rs. 225/- plus dearness allowance. This order is Ex. 3 on record. Against this order of reversion the petitioner made a number of representations and vide Ex. 4, which is dated 15-7-65, the petitioner was informed by the Deputy Director of Education that in the Annual Confidential Report for the year 1950-60 while he was reported to be a Headmaster certain adverse entries in the Rolls came to be recorded against him. The petitioner demurred and lodged a representation against what was conveyed to him vide Ex. 4 and eventually the Additional Director of Education wrote to him to say vide Ex. 5, that the petitioner's reversion had been made on account of adverse entries in the Confidential Reports in 1959-60 which had already been communicated to him. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner is assailing the order of his reversion Ex. 3 from the post of Officiating Headmaster to that of an Assistant Teacher. In assailing this order the petitioner states that while many persons junior to the petitioner were either allowed to continue as Officiating Headmasters or they came to be promoted subsequent to the petitioner's reversion, the legitimate claim of the petitioner had at all material times been overlooked. It is pointed that the action taken against the petitioner was penal in character, as the petitioner had been visited with evil consequences in the shape of reduction of salary, losing future prospects of promotion and other losses of like nature. In the circumstances it is contended that the order Ex. 3 is violative of both Art. 311 as well as Art. 16 of the Constitution. It was further urged in this behalf that even the Government instructions regarding the communication of the so-called adverse entries to the petitioner were not followed. Petitioner proceeds to say that even though these entries, according to the respondents, came to be made as back as in the year 1959-60, they were communicated to the petitioner for the first time only in the year 1965 and all along he had been continuing as Officiating Headmaster in the higher grade Apart from this, it is pointed out that the entries were factually wrong in that the petitioner was not at all a Headmaster in 1959 60, as mentioned in the so-called adverse entries; the petitioner having been first appointed as Officiating Headmaster only from July, 1960. It is submitted that if the petitioner were afforded an opportunity of having his say against the so-called adverse entries he would have explained that the entries had no relation to the factual position and were even otherwise unwarranted.