M.R. Calla, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the Judgment & Order dated 31.1.2000 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby, the writ petition was allowed with cost of Rs. 2000/-.
(2.) Mr. Mathur has argued before us that so far as the directions of the learned Single Judge for passing orders in compliance of the earlier order dated 23.7.1997 treating the respondent as Class-IV employee w.e.f. 5.2.1996 is concerned, and the consequential payments to be made to him on that basis, there is no dispute. However, he contends that the respondents could not be given the benefit of the Circular dated 4.3.1998 and so far as the directions of the learned Single Judge that the question of giving the semi permanent status to the respondents be decided by following the Circular dated 4.3.1998 is concerned, the same cannot be sustained. Mr. Mathur has submitted that the Circular dated 4.3.1998 deals with the cases of Work Charged employees. The respondent herein was appointed as an employee on daily wages but he was never appointed as a Work Charged employee. He has further submitted that the rules for Work Charged employees under the Rajasthan Work Charged Code as were framed in the year 1964 are not at all applicable to the Education Department in which the respondent was appointed as such and the Work Charged Rules are applicable to PWD, Road & Buildings, Garden Department including the Irrigation Department etc.
(3.) We find that this limited part of the direction given by the learned Single Judge is not sustainable in view of the Rules of 1964.;