Skip to content


Rajendra Prasad Dube Vs. State of Rajasthan - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectService
CourtRajasthan High Court
Decided On
Case NumberS.B. Civil Writ No. 1817 of 1976
Judge
Reported in1983WLN(UC)342
AppellantRajendra Prasad Dube
RespondentState of Rajasthan
DispositionPetition allowed
Cases ReferredSudarshan Sood v. State of Punjab
Excerpt:
rajasthan civil services (revised) pay rules, 1961 - scales no. 16 and 13--craft teacher grade ii--condition of graduation relaxed--held, he is entitled to be absorbed in pay scale no. 16 and not in no. 13.;in view of the aforesaid relaxation that was made with regard to the condition of graduation in the case of the petitioner by the absorption committee, the failure on the part of petitioner to satisfy the requirement relating to the qualification of graduation could not be a ground for denial of fixation of the petitioner in the scale no. 16 of the revised pay rules. in my opinion, therefore, the petitioner on his being absorbed on the part of the craft teacher was entitled to be fixed in pay scale no. 16 and he has been wrongly fixed is pay scale no. 13 of the revised pay rules.;(b)..........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,.....
Judgment:

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. After filing of the writ petition the petitioner filed an additional affidavit in support of the writ petition on 15 3.1977. Along with the said affidavit, the petitioner filed certain documents including the letter (Anx. 18) dated March 5/6. 1969, the order (Anna 20) dated January 24, 1974 with regard to the appointment of Visbanath Agrawal as Craft Teacher in the Pay Scale Rs. 115-335 (Pay Scale No. 16) and the certification (Anx. 21) dated 30. 12.1959 issued by the Department of Industries, Uttar Pradesh, Govt. Central Weaving, Institute, Benaras, about the petitioner having attended the course of instruction in the Advance class of the said institution in Mechanism, Design and Cloth Analysis, Dyeing and Drawing, Practical (Weaving, Dyeing and Spinning) and. his having been placed in Second Division in the final examination 1959 of the said course

4. No reply to the writ petition and the additional affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents.

5. Shri Mridul, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has urged the following two cotentions--

(i) On his appointment on the post of Craft Teacher the petitioner was entitled to be placed in pay Scale No. 16 of the Revised Pay Rules in as much as prior to bis absorption on the said post the petitioner was holding the post of powerloom Instructor in pay scale No. 16 and further that in view of the relaxation with regard to the condition of graduation made by the Absorption Committee the petitioner could not be denied fixation in the pay Scale No. 16 of the Revised Pay Rules on the ground that he does not ulfil the minimum qualification of graduation prescribed for the said scale; and

(ii) The petitioner has been arbitrarily discriminated in disregard to the provisions of Article 14 and 16 in as much as another person viz, Vishwanath Agrawal, who is similarly situated as the petitioner, has been fixed in Pay Scale No. 16 whereas the petitioner has been fixed in Pay Scale No. 13.

6. Before dealing with the aforesaid contentions urged by Shri Mridul it would be necessary to notice the relevant provisions of the Revised Pay Rules with regard to pay Scale No. 13 and 16 . Fay Scale No. 13 of the Revised Pay Rules was Rs. 115-165 EB 250. Pay Scale No. 16 of the said Rules was Rs. 115-225-EB-335. Under the schedule 111 to the Revised Pay Rules, the various posts in the various department of the Government and the pay scales applicable to the said posts have been set out. Section D of the said Schedule includes the posts of teachers in arts, crafts and music in colleges and High School classes who are graduate with training prescribed by the Government. Pay Scale No.16 i.e. Rs. 115-225 EB 335, has been prescribed for graduate trained trachers of High and Higher Secondary classes. For untrained graduate teachers in middle school, Pay Scale No. 13, Rs. 115-165 EB 250 was prescribed The Revised Pay Rules were amended by the Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Amendment) Rules 1967 promulgated by notification of the Government of Rajasthan dated 7th October, 1967. By the aferesaid amendment Rules, the entry in shedule III to the Revised Pay Rules relating to the posts of teachers in Scale No. 16 was amended and the following entre was inserted with effect from 1.9.1961, the date on which the Revised Pay Rules came into effect:

Teachers in Arts in Secondary School Graduate with Drawing or enquivalent Drawing examination recognised by the Depratment.

Teachers in Crafts in Secondry School Graduate with certificate in craft education recognised by the Department.

Teachers in Music in Secondary School Graduate with Music or equivalent Examination recognised by the Department.

Physical Training Instructors Graduate with Diploma in Physical Education or Certificate recognised by the Department.

As a result of the aferesaid amendment in the Revised Pay Rules the qualification of training was dispensed with in respect of teachers in craft in Secondary School and the qualification that was required was graduate with certificate in Craft Education recognised by the Department.

7. With reagrd to his first contention Shri Mridul has submitted that the petitioner was entitled to be placed in Scale No. 16 of the Revised Pay Rules in as much as the petitioner satisfied the requirements with regard to qualification as laid down in the Revised Pay Rules, as amended, for the post of teachers in craft in Secondary Schools. In this regard Shri Mridul has pointed out that the petitioner holds a certificate in Craft Education issued by the Government Control Weaving Institute Banaras which is recognised by the Department and as regards the qualification of graduation the same cannot be insisted upon in the case of the petitioner in view of the relaxation made by the Absorption Committee at the time when the petitioner was aborbed on the post of craft teacher. Shri Mridul has, in this context, submitted that the aforesaid relaxation in the qualification with regard to graduation that was made by the Absorption Committee enures for the benefit of the petitioner during the entire period of his service and in view of the relaxation the petitioner cannot be deprived of his right to be fixed in Pay Scale No. 16 only on the ground that he does not possess the qualification of graduation In support of his aforesaid submission Shri Mridul his placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in Jagdish Pandey v. Chancellor 1968 SLR 252 and the decision of the High Court of Punjab and Hariyana in Sudarshan Sood v. State of Punjab 1969 SLR 715 In my opinion the aforesaid contention urged by Shri Mridul must be accepted, In view of the amendment that was introduced in the Revised pay Rules by the Revised Pay Amendment Rules, 1967 promulgated vide notification dated 7th October, 1967 Teachers in craft in Secondary Schools were entitled to be placed in Scale No. 16 of the Revised by Rules provided they were graduates with certificate in craft education recognised by the Department. In the present case the petitioner has placed on record the certificate (Ann. 21) issued by the Govt. Central Weaving Institute Benaras of the Department of Industries of U.P. which shows that the petitioner had regularly attended the course of instruction in the advance class of that Institution in the subjects, Mechanism, Design and Cloth Ananlysis, Dyeing and Drawing Practical (Weaving, Dyeing and Spinning) and that he was placed in Second Division in the final Exam nation held in 1959. In Para 5 of the additional affidavit dated 15th March, 1977 the petitioner has stated that the aforesaid certificate of craft education has been recognised by the Education Department of the Government of Rajasthan. There has been no denial on behalf of the respondents of the aforesaid assertion made by the petitioner. In the circumstances it must be held that since 1959, the petitioner holds a certificate in craft education which is recognised by the Education Department of the Government of Rajasthan. As regards the other condition required by the Revised Pay Rules, namely, graduation, it may be mentioned hat the petitioner admittedly does not possess the said qualification. But from the order (Ann. 2) dated 16-9-1963 it appears that at the time when the case of the petitioner was considered for absorption on a suitable post by the Absorption Committee constituted in accordance with the Circular of Government Rajaslhan dated 12-6-1982 the Absorption Committee, while recommending the absorption of the petitioner on the post of Teacher (Grade II craft, decided to relax the condition of graduation in the case of the petitioner. In viwe of the aforesaid relaxation that was made with regard to the condition of graduation in the case of the petitioner by the Absorption Committee, the failure on the part of petitioner to satisfy the requirement relating to the qualification of graduation could not be a ground for denial of fixation of the petitioner in the Scale No. 16 of the Revised Pay Rules. In my opinion, therefore, the petitioner on his being absorbed on the part of the Craft Teacher was entitled to be fixed in pay scale No. 16 and he has been wrongly fixed in pay scale No. 13 of the Revised Pay Rules.

8. The second contention urged by Shri Mridual was that the petitioner has been denied equality of opportunity in the matter of employment in as much as another person similar situate viz Vishwanath Agarwal, who also is not a graduate but is only Intermediate like the petitioner and holds a certificate in craft education similar to that held by the petitioner, has been fixed in pay scale No. 16 of the Revised Pay Rules. In support of his aforesaid contention Shri Mirdul has invited my attention to the order (Ann. 20) dated 24-1-1974 passed by the Joint Director of Education, Ajmer Circle, Jodhpur whereby Vishwanath Agarwal, who had been absorbed on the post of craft teacher Grade II by order dated 4-11-19.33 and was placed in pay scale Rs. 115-250 was refixed in pay scale Rs. 113-345 scale No. 16 Shri Mirdual has pointed out that in ground No. IV of the writ petition it is specifically stated that the petitioner possesses qualifications identical to that possessed by Vishwanath Agrawal and that both of them have passed the Intermedrate examination and both of them are craft trained and that the aforesaid assertaion in the writ petition has not been controverted by the respondents. The submission of Shri Mridul is that this shows that even though the petitioner and Vishwanath Agrawal are persons similarly situate, there has been discrimination between the two in the matter of fixation in pay scales and while Vishwanath has been placed in scale No. 16 the petitioner has been denied scale No. 16 and he has been placed in scale No. 13. In my opinion the aforesaid contention urged by Shri Mridul also merits acceptance In view of the definite assertion by the petitioner in ground IV of the writ petition, which has not been controverted by the respondents, it must be held that the petitioner and Vishwanath Agrawal are persons similarly situate in as much as both of them are nongraduates and have passed the Intermediate Examination and both are craft trained. By order (An. 20) dated 24-1-1974 Vishwanath Agrawal, who was earlier fixed in Pay Scale No. 13, has been fixed in Pay Scale No. 16. The petitioner has, however, been denied fixation in pay scale No. 16. The case of the petitioner stands on stronger footing than Vishwanath Agrawal because prior to his being declared surplus the petitioner was holding the post of powerloom Instructor in pay scale Rs. 115-335 i.e. Pay scale No. 16 of the Revised Pay Rules. The denial of Pay Scale No. 16 to the petitioner after his absorption on the post of craft Teacher was, therefore, is disregard of the right to equality in the matter of employment guaranteed Under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

9. In the result the writ petition is allowed and it is declared that the petitioner, on his absorption on the post of craft teacher, was entitled to be placed in Scale No. 16 (Rs. 115- 35) of the Revised Pay Rules and it is directed that he should be so fixed in the said Pay scale. The petitioner would also be entitled to the consequential benefits to which, he is found enitled as a result of the aforesaid re-fixation in Pay Scale No. 16. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs in this writ petition.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //