Skip to content


State of Rajasthan Vs. Gaj Raj Mehta - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectService
CourtRajasthan High Court
Decided On
Case NumberS.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 111 of 1973
Judge
Reported in1975WLN(UC)307
AppellantState of Rajasthan
RespondentGaj Raj Mehta
DispositionAppeal dismissed
Excerpt:
.....effect by rule 12 of juvenile justice rule, 2007 - as such, accused has to be treated as juvenile under the said act. - 'w' dated february 4, 1965 that his case was under consideration, this thing was repeated in a like memorandum vide ex. 9. now it was within the discretion of the learned single judge to entertain the writ petition once he was satisfied that there was sufficient cause for the delay. 12. to our mind this notification clearly entitles a male nurse-cum-compounder who has passed the matriculation examination or its equivalent and has under gone four years training and passed the b......narses-cum compounders who have passedthe matriculation examination or itsequivalent and the four grade examinationpreseribed for compounders.grade iv will be applicable to all othermale-nurse- compounders who come up to theminimum prescribed standard. the numberof the appointments in grade iii will helimited to 40% of the appointment in gradeiii and iv taken together.note : probationary nurses (women) and male-nurses-cum compounders under going a four years course and training for the b.p.n.a. examination or its equivalent, matrons, sister tutors, sisters staff nurses-cum-compounders in grade i and ii will be entitled to a messing allowance of rs. 40/- p.m. and to six sets of uniforms per year. they will also be entitled to free quarters, electricity water and laundry, public health.....
Judgment:

Kan Singh, J.

1. This special appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 before us, is brought against the judgment of a learned Single Judge dated March 27, 1973 in a writ petition relating to the fixation of the respondent Gajraj Mehta in the higher grade as Male Nurse-cum-Componder.

2. The facts lie in a narrow compass and have been set out with clarity in the judgment of the learned Single Judge. We may briefly recapitulate such of them as are necessary for the disposal of the appeal.

3. Gajraj Mehta entered the service of the former Jodhpur State on 3rd November 1944 as a Male Nurse. After the merger of the former Jodhpur State with the new State of Rajasthan a cadre of Male Nurse cum-Compo-under Grade I was created in 1951. The entry into that cadre was, however, allowed only to those Male Nurses cum-Compounder who passed the matriculation examination and the B.P.N.A. or its equivalent examination and further who were employed in a class I hospital. We will be referring to that notification in the later part of our judgment. So far as the factual aspect is concerned the petitioner was non-matriculate when he first entered the service of the former Jodhpur State or when in Rajasthan the cadre of Male Nursecum-Compounder Grade I was created in the year 1951. He, however, passed the matriculation examination in the year 1953. Thereupon be made a representation to the authorities tor his fixation, in the prescribed pay grade of Rs. 150-5-200 from, April 1, 1953. The Principal, Medical and Health Officer, Jodhpur, however, fixed his pay in grade I by his order Ex. D' dated October 4, 1957 with effect from March 1, 1956 on the ground that from this date be started working in grade I hospital. It was further mentioned in the order that the salary would be payable to an incumbent as and from the date when such incumbent took over charge in grade I hospital or to others who were already working in such hospitals. The petitioner went on making representations for his fixation from the earlier dates but they were turned down. Ultimately he was informed by the order Ex 'K' dated June 28, 1963 that the petitioner could not be considered for fixation in Grade I from April 1, 1953. The petitioner was, however, not discouraged and be made representations again but they too were rejected. Ultimately on his representation dated June 18, 1964 the Government wrote him to say vide memorandum Ex. 'W' dated February 4, 1965 that his case was under consideration, This thing was repeated in a like memorandum vide Ex. Y dated May 31 1965 that the final decision of the Government may be awaited. On 17-7-1967, however, the Government issued an order published in the Rajasthan Gazette dated September 21, 1967, which inter alia laid down that retrospective promotions could be given to indumberts by creation of supernumerary posts or by upgrading of posts in the case of tactual error or mis apptication, or non-compliance with the Rules or orders. This again encouraged the petitioner and he served a notice under Section 80 C.P.C. on the Government (Ex. z) calling upon the Government to promote him to grede I with effect from March 1953. As nothing came out of this notice the petitioner filed the writ petition in this Court on September 10, 1968

4. He claimed that be should be placed in grade I of Rs. 150-5-200 with effect from April 1, 1953 and given increments and other consequential benefits from the aforesaid date.

5. The State traversed the petitioner' claim. It was denied that the petitioner was entitled to the grade I of Rs. 150-5-200 from any date earlier to the one from which be was fixed in that grade. It was further contended that the writ petition was filed after an inordinate delay and, therefore, the same should be dismissed on that score.

6. Learned Single Judge reached the conclusion that there was satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the writ petition. As regards the merits of the petitioner's claim, after examining the factual position the Learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that the benefit of grade 150-5-200 should have been given to the petitioner from April 27, 1955. Accordingly the writ petition was allowed in part as stated above.

7. It is against this order that the State has came up in appeal.

8. The learned Additional Advocate General has reiterated the contentions that were raised before the learned Single Judge.

9. Now it was within the discretion of the learned Single Judge to entertain the writ petition once he was satisfied that there was sufficient cause for the delay. The two memoranda issued by the Government, one on February 4, 1955 Ex. 'W' and the other on May 31, 1965 Ex. 'Y' leave no room for doubt that the Government were considering the matter. This is confirmed by the fact that on July 17, 1967 the Government had issued a notification published in Rajasthan Gazette on September 21, 1967 that retrospective prom obtain may be given to the incumbents by creation of supernumerary posts or by upgrading the posts in the case of factual error or mis-application or noncompliance with the rules or orders.

10. This could naturally create an impression in the mind of the petitioner that his case would be dealt with accordingly. Therefore, he could legitimately, think of making a representation to the Government and this he did on November 20, 1967 (Ex. 2) though it was characterised as notice under Section 80 CPC Its object was to enable the Government to consider the petitioner's case. If after pursuing the matter with the Government and not getting any relief the petitioner came up o this Court on September 10, 1938 i.e. after 10 months, then we are afraid it cannot be held that the writ petition was filed by him with such an inordinate delay as to warrant its summary dismissal.

11. As regards the petitioner's fixation the learned Single Judge has reached the conclusion that the petitioner was fulfilling the requirements of the notification from April 27, 1955 and we are in agreement with him. Here we may read the notification:

Sub: Rajasthan Civil Services (Unification of Pay Scales) Rules...

No. F.1 (1) R/51- His Highness the Rajpramukh is pleased to make the following further additions and amendments to the Rajasthan Civil Services (Unification of Pay Scale) Rules :

53. Male Nurses-cum Grade I and II will be applicableCompounders only to Male Nurses-cum CompounderGrade I who have passed the matriculation150 5-200 examination or its equivalentGrade II undergone a four years training100 5-150 end passed the B. P. N A.Grade III 80-4-100. examination or its equivalent andEB-5-120 are employed in Class I and classclass II Hospitals.Grade IV Grade III will be applicable to Male50.3-80 Narses-cum Compounders who have passedthe Matriculation Examination or itsequivalent and the four grade examinationpreseribed for compounders.Grade IV will be applicable to all otherMale-Nurse- Compounders who come up to theminimum prescribed standard. The numberof the appointments in Grade III will helimited to 40% of the appointment in GradeIII and IV taken together.Note : Probationary Nurses (women) and Male-Nurses-cum compounders under going a four years course and training for the B.P.N.A. Examination or its equivalent, Matrons, Sister Tutors, Sisters Staff Nurses-cum-Compounders in Grade I and II will be entitled to a messing allowance of Rs. 40/- P.M. and to six sets of uniforms per year. They will also be entitled to free quarters, electricity water and laundry, public Health Nurses will be eligible to 6 sets of uniforms per year and a house allowance, but not the messing allowance.

12. To our mind this notification clearly entitles a Male Nurse-cum-Compounder who has passed the matriculation examination or its equivalent and has under gone four years training and passed the B.P.N.A examination or its equivalent and employed in a class I hospital to grade I i.e. 150-5-200 as from the date such persons having fulfilled the other qualification starts working as a Male Nurse-cum-Compounder in a class I hospital. The appeal has thus no force and, hereby dismissed with costs.


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