“15. At the very outset, we may clearly state that the decision in Chandra Shekhar [ Chandra Shekhar v. State of Rajasthan , Special Appeal Writ No. 377 of 1996, order dated 6-1-1998 (Raj)] pertains to grant of increments for the period prior to regularisation. It has nothing to do with the grant of selection grade. The circulars which we have reproduced hereinbefore relate to grant of selection grade. In this backdrop, it is to be seen what has been laid down by this Court in Jagdish Narain Chaturvedi [ State of Rajasthan v. Jagdish Narain Chaturvedi , (2009) 12 SCC 49 : (2010) 1 SCC (L&S) 105] . In the said case, a two-Judge Bench was dealing with the issue whether ad hoc appointments or appointments on daily wages or work-charge basis could be treated as appointments made to the cadre/service in accordance with the provisions contained in the recruitment rules as contemplated by the Government Orders dated 25-1-1992 and 17-2-1998. It was contended on behalf of the State that stagnation benefits were given from the date of regularisation and for the said purpose reliance was placed on the authority in State of Haryana v. Haryana Veterinary & AHTS Assn. [(2000) 8 SCC 4 : 2000 SCC (L&S) 1043] Reference was made to the language used in the circulars which uses the words “appointments relatable to the existing cadre/service”. The Court referred to the provisions of the Rajasthan Absorption of Surplus Personnel Rules, 1969 and various paragraphs from the Haryana case [(2000) 8 SCC 4 : 2000 SCC (L&S) 1043] and the decision in Ram Ganesh Tripathi v. State of U.P. [(1997) 1 SCC 621 : 1997 SCC (L&S) 186] and came to hold as follows: ( Jagdish Narain Chaturvedi case [ State of Rajasthan v. Jagdish Narain Chaturvedi , (2009) 12 SCC 49 : (2010) 1 SCC (L&S) 105] , SCC pp. 57-58, para 18)
