Petitioners seeking status and salary of Pump Operator despite holding post of Assistant (Beldar). Bench referred to a prior decision and directed them to make representations for consideration within three months.
Petitioners directed to make representation to respondents who shall consider same within three months. Stay application disposed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 12335/2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. ORDER
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 12335/2015 WITH S.B. CIVIL MISC. STAY APPLICATION NO. 10797/2015
RAVINDRA KUMAR & ANOTHER VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANOTHER.
DATE OF ORDER : 04.09.2015
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
Mr. Deendayal Khandelwal, for the petitioners.
BY THE COURT:
Petitioners have filed this writ petition for a direction to respondents to grant them status of post of Pump Operator and further to fix and pay them salary as per the pay scale of Pump Operator with all consequential benefits from the date of their initial appointment.
Petitioners were initially appointed on daily wages basis on the post of Assistant (Beldar) on 01.09.1987 and 01.11.1987, respectively and continued to work on the post. It is contended that the petitioners from the date of their initial appointment have been discharging the duties of the post of Pump Operator. They were granted semi permanent status vide order dated 03.08.1992. Time and again the respondents have issued orders to the petitioners and from these orders it is clearly that the petitioners have been discharging their duties on the post of Pump Operator with utmost satisfaction but despite that their status has been fixed as Assistant. The petitioners made representations and also served legal notice for demand of justice for extending them the benefit of the post of Pump Operator but the respondents did not pay
2
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 12335/2015
any heed thereto. Hence this writ petition.
Contention of learned counsel for petitioners is that controversy involved in this case is squarely covered by a decision of this Court rendered in Lal Chand Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan and Others – S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4838/1996, decided on 02.02.2010, wherein the writ petition has been allowed in the following terms:
“Accordingly, the writ petition succeeds and the same is hereby allowed. The respondents are directed to declare the petitioner semi-permanent and so also permanent on completion of two years and ten years of service on the post of Store Munshi of which duties are being discharged by him under Rule 3(3) and 3(2) of the Rules, 1964 with all consequential benefits. The respondents shall ensure the compliance within three months. No costs.”
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that aforesaid judgment has also been upheld by a Division Bench of this Court.
Having regard to the facts of the present case, writ petition is disposed of requiring the petitioners to make representation to respondents, who shall consider and decide the same in the light of aforesaid judgment, within three months from the date of its making. Stay application also stands disposed of.
(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J.
Manoj, S.NO.119. “All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.” MANOJ NARWANI Personal Assistant.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether petitioners appointed as Assistant (Beldar) discharging duties of Pump Operator are entitled to status of Pump Operator.
Whether a stay application pending in these matter should be continued or disposed.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Lal Chand SharmaReferred¶15
Lal Chand Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan and Others – S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4838/1996
RAVINDRA KUMAR & ANOTHER
STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANOTHER
MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
