Held that the appeal was disposed of without scrutiny as the appellate court had already remanded the matter without recording evidence on continuity of service. This judgment confirms that the appellate interference is void and the matter will be examined by the Court below in the first instance.
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.
[2024:RJ-JP:40100]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 955/2023
Naval Kishore Sharma Son Of Shri Jainarayan Sharma, Aged About 64 Years, Resident Of Hadotya Colony, Gangapur City District Sawai Madhopur Retired Teacher Grade Third, Rajkiya Uchh Prathmik Vidhyalaya, Dolatpur, Gangapur City, District Sawai Madhopur.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Akhil Simlote, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.S. Chhaba, AAG with Mr. Avinash Choudhary, Adv. & Mr. Hardik Singh, Adv. Ms. Shruti Pareek, AGC Mr. Ramdhan, AGC
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS Judgment / Order
21/09/2024
jktLFkku flfoy lsok vihy vf/kdj.k] t;iqj ¼ftls vkxs vf/kdj.k dgk tk,xk½ }kjk vihy la[;k 4492@2018 esa ikfjr
[CCP-955/2023]
[2024:RJ-JP:40100]
(2 of 4)
vkns'k fnukad 25-10-2021 dh dfFkr voKk ds laca/k esa ;kph }kjk voekuuk ;kfpdk vf/kdj.k ds le{k izLrqr dh x;h] tgka ls lanfHkZr gksdj bl U;k;ky; dks izkIr gqbZA
vf/kdj.k }kjk ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 25-10-2021 dk lqlaxr iSjk la[;k&5 fuEukuqlkj gS&
"We have heard the counsel for the appellant and respondents and gone through the appeal memo, reply and documents. The Circular of 25.01.1992 provides that selection scale benefit under ACP is admissible from the date of regular appointment only. The services of the appellant was regularized in the year 2005 by the District Establishment Committee. The committee sanctioned leave without pay for 585 days from 18.05.1988 to 21.12.1990. The committee also passed order for regularization from the initial date of appointment namely 23.04.1988. The committee has given reference to letter issued by the State Government by Special Secretary in 1988-89. Letters have not been submitted either by the appellant or by the respondents. It has also not been submitted as to whether the services of the appellant after 15.05.1988 when the initial appointment orders are passed, continued or not. This Tribunal in past has held that if the service of an employee appointed on adhoc or temporary basis continued subsequently without break, he deserves the selection scale benefit from the date of initial appointment only because he provided regular services. In this case no documents have been shown that the appellant has continuously been working after 15.05.1988 till date of issue of regularization order dated 18.01.2005. Although the order of 18.01.2005 has provided leave of absence from 16.05.1988 to 21.12/1990, but subsequent appointment orders have not been shown to us. The
[2024:RJ-JP:40100]
[CCP-955/2023]
(3 of 4)
State Government has, therefore, taken the date of 18.01.2005 as the date of regularization. The Jagdish Narain Chaturvedi case decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is applicable in the cases of irregular appointment on adhoc basis. In the current case, the appointment had taken place by the Vikas Adhikari by obtaining names from Man Power Department. The appellant had acquired B.A., B.Ed. He is within the age limit also. Since no documents with regard to continuity of service have been provided. therefore, we remand back the matter with direction that respondents must verify from the records about continuity of service and if the appellant rendered continuous service from 1990 onwards till 2005 when the order by District Establishment Committee was issued, the benefit of selection scale under ACP available on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service may be granted to the appellant from the date of initial appointment only. All other consequential benefits in that case will ensue otherwise the original order passed by the department would hold the ground. The department must pass an order within a period of 3 months after verification of the records. If still aggrieved the appellant would be free to approach the Tribunal."
fo}ku vf/koDrk izkFkhZ dk ;|fi ;g fuosnu gS fd o"kZ 1990 ls 2005 rd rnFkZ vk/kkj ij ysfdu fujarj lsok izkFkhZ }kjk foHkkx esa dh x;h Fkh] ysfdu bl laca/k esa dksbZ nLrkost uk rks vf/kdj.k esa izLrqr fd;s vkSj uk gh bl U;k;ky; esa izLrqr gq, gSaA voekuuk ;kfpdk ds ekeys esa bl U;k;ky; dk {ks=kf/kdkj lhfer gS rFkk ikfjr vkns'k dh O;k[;k esa vkSj vf/kd foLrkj fd;k tkuk laHko ugha gSA
[CCP-955/2023]
[2024:RJ-JP:40100]
(4 of 4)
orZeku ekeys esa vizkFkhZ foHkkx }kjk tokc izLrqr dj ;g fuosnu fd;k fd vfHkys[k dk ijh{k.k djus ds mijkUr LØhfuax desVh dh fjiksVZ ds vk/kkj ij o"kZ 2005 ls gh deZpkjh vFkkZr izkFkhZ dks fujarj lsok esa ekurs gq, laiw.kZ ykHk fn;s tk pqds gSa] vkns'k fnukad 05-07-2023 dh izfr Hkh izLrqr dh x;h gSA fo}ku vf/koDrk izkFkhZ }kjk ;g ikyuk i;kZIr ugha gksuk vius i'pkrorhZ tokc esa crk;k gSA
laiw.kZ ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa vf/kdj.k }kjk ikfjr vkns'k dh ikyuk foi{khx.k }kjk dh tk pqdh gS] vkns'k fnukad 05-07-2023 ds ckn vHkh Hkh dksbZ fookn gS] rks vf/kdj.k ds vkns'k dh ikyuk esa izkFkhZ iqu% vf/kdj.k ds le{k viuk i{k j[kus gsrq Lora= gSA foi{khx.k }kjk vf/kdj.k ds vkns'k dh dksbZ tkucw>dj voKk dh x;h gks] ,slh fLFkfr izdV ugh gqbZ gSA
vr% laiw.kZ ifjfLFkfr;ksa dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq, orZeku voekuuk ;kfpdk vLohdkj dj [kkfjt dh tkrh gSA tkjh'kqnk uksfVl Hkh lekIr fd;s tkrs gSaA
(UMA SHANKER VYAS),J
MANISH SAINI /29
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to selection scale benefit from the date of initial appointment or from the date of regularization.
Whether there was continuous service of the petitioner from 1990 to 2005 despite lack of documentary evidence.
Whether the matter requires remand to the department to verify records regarding continuity of service.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Jagdish Narain Chaturvedi caseExplained¶22
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Naval Kishore Sharma
Shri Kanaram
Shri Nathulal Khateek
Shri Abhishek Khanna
Chief Block Primary District Education Officer, Gangapur City
Shri Sanjay Solanki
Uma Shanker Vyas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
