Dismissed

Raj. State Road Trans. Corpn. and Anr. v. Tara Chand

Rajasthan HC2 Dec 2021SAW/524/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an appeal by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation challenging a Single Judge's order that denied delaying an employee's pay up-gradation based on a departmental Circular issued after the underlying punishments were imposed.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed, upholding the lower court's judgment which denied the RTC's claim for delay in pay up-gradation.

Raj. State Road Trans. Corpn. and Anr. Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 524/2018

¶3

The Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Head Office, Chomu House, C-Scheme, Jaipur Through Its Managing Director.

¶4

The Chief Manager, Rajasthan Road Transport Corporation, Hanumangarh Depot, Hanumangarh.

¶5

----Appellants

¶6

Versus

¶7

Tara Chand S/o Shri Bhagwan Da, Resident Of Ward No. 2, Post Pilibangan, District Hanumangarh Rajasthan.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Harish Purohit. For Respondent(s) : Mr. D.S. Thind.

¶10

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

¶11

Order

¶12

02/12/2021

¶13

This appeal is filed by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation to challenge the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 25.01.2017 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8810/2014.

¶14

The original petitioner (respondent herein) was appointed as Driver by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation. He was granted benefit of first pay up-gradation on 06.10.1999. After further nine years, his second pay up-gradation was due on 06.10.2008. This was not granted on the ground that he was visited with certain departmental penalties and, as per the Circular dated 21.05.2004 issued by the Department, considering the monetary penalties imposed on the petitioner his pay up-gradation in the higher pay scale was deferred appropriately.

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[SAW-524/2018]

¶17

The learned Single by the impugned judgment held that all the punishments imposed were before the issuance of Circular dated 21.05.2009 and the said Circular, therefore, would not apply.

¶18

We are broadly in agreement with the view taken by the learned Single Judge. The RSRTC has come out with the Circular, which provided that in addition to imposing monetary penalties, the increment of the employee would be delayed by a range of 1 to 3 years depending on the quantum of punishment imposed being Rs.5,000/- for one year, Rs.25,000/- for two years, and Rs.25,000/- and more for three years respectively.

¶19

According to the employer, if the employee did not have satisfactory service and on account of which his claim for grant of second pay up-gradation was denied, perhaps we would not interfere. However, to defer such benefit on the basis of penalty already imposed and suffered penalties that too by way of Circular, which was subsequently issued, would not be permissible.

¶20

In the result, the appeal is dismissed. Early hearing application is disposed of.

¶21

(SUDESH BANSAL),J (AKIL KURESHI),CJ

¶22

46-a.asopa/-

Raj. State Road Trans. Corpn. and Anr. v. Tara Chand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj. State Road Trans. Corpn. and Anr. v. Tara Chand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nitesh Sharma Vs the Union of India

Navneet Soni Vs State and Ors.

Safi Mohammad Vs State of Rajasthan

Kanwari Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Sunil Kachhawaha Vs State of Rajasthan

Surendra Khatri Vs the State of Rajasthan